this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2025
58 points (100.0% liked)

GenZedong

4862 readers
85 users here now

This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.

See this GitHub page for a collection of sources about socialism, imperialism, and other relevant topics.

This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.

We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
GrainEater@lemmygrad.ml
Elara@lemmygrad.ml
ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml
American_Communist22@lemmygrad.ml
58
Why is China still under socialism with Chinese characteristics? (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 3 days ago by WilliamA@lemmygrad.ml to c/genzedong@lemmygrad.ml
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I understand that the market reforms where great for the people of China and helped it develop into a global superpower competing with the USA. However, now that there is such growth, shouldn't they start tuning down the private sector until it's fully replaced? Similar market reforms happened in the USSR, but that was replaced when the USSR economy grew. I tried to research it, but all I got was capitalist bs from the west. Also, even with the private sector, shouldn't higher education be paid for? I understand that there is nuance and it is not that simple, that is why I'm posting this: I want to understand the nuance, not to spread ultra bs.

top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Munrock@lemmygrad.ml 30 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Something important to note about China's private sector compared to Western liberal ones, is that it's highly regulated, and because of that a lot of the disgustingly abusive ways that private corporations treat the public just doesn't happen there.

For example, with ads in apps. It's just accepted knowledge that with 'free' apps, you are the product and the app sells your data and/or attention to advertisers. In China that's all extremely regulated: if you see an ad, it's got to come with some kind of special offer or deal that benefits you, and not in bullshit "mark the price up and then discount it back down" kinds of ways.

So in the West the app sells your attention to the advertisers; in China the app sells access to you and the advertisers give you coupons and discounts (that automatically get processed by the app's payment system) in exchange for your attention.

And the most important part is that if people report an ad, the government will be on the side of the public when it investigates, as opposed to the toothless reporting systems that nobody bothers with in the West.

The net effect of this, and many many other kinds of 'authoritarian' regulatory laws that don't exist in the west, is that I'm not experiencing the same kind of enshittification in China as I am in the West.

[–] Duplexity01@hexbear.net 6 points 2 days ago

Thank you for your explanation. I learned something new today.

In the west, NO MATTER HOW MUCH YOU PAY, you are still the product. There's no avoiding it, and it angers me so much

[–] blobii@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 2 days ago

Now I understand why a lot of Chinese online retailers always have flashy deals in their ads!

It all makes sense

[–] WilliamA@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I've heard accusations of shitty working conditions in China where people slave long times at companies like shein and temu (not limited to them though) for cents. Western bs?

[–] Munrock@lemmygrad.ml 21 points 2 days ago (2 children)

"Shitty working conditions" is very subjective.

They're allowed to go to the toilet.

And if you're working in the city, you're there by choice and moving back to a rural life is an option.

And you got free healthcare.

And the company has to provide boarding if you can't afford your own place at city rental rates.

How does that all line up against working at an Amazon Fulfillment Center or Walmart?

What isn't subjective is that shitty working conditions in China are improving, while shitty working conditions under neoliberalism are getting worse.

[–] Duplexity01@hexbear.net 9 points 2 days ago

I work with shitty conditions already. The Chinese people are very diligent and hardworking, and that's one of the factors to consider when analysing China.

I think one of the greatest things about China is being free from religious attacks. Religion is used to control the peoples everywhere around the world, I wonder if the chinese know about this. The more irreligious a people, the better off they are

[–] VladimirLimeMint@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

There's a video while ago by a black American teacher in Chengdu who explained that she got free healthcare coverage and benefits for being a college lecturer just like her peers in China.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9v2wBwDXls

Also a TikTok video by Buddhawang where he explained that even no name fast food joints have to have coverage for benefits, sick leaves, maternal care, vacations, and injury care mandated by China labor laws.

[–] TankieReplyBot@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:

[–] cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml 48 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

The simple answer is: because it's working. Why would they abandon a policy that has been and continues to be incredibly successful? That's not to say there haven't been issues that have come up along the way, such as the massive corruption problem in the 90s and early 2000s, or the real estate bubble, or the out-of-control private tutoring industry.

Whenever such an issue appears which starts to seriously threaten social stability and negatively affect the positive trajectory that China is on, it is addressed and dealt with, as the aforementioned issues were. Other more minor issues are handled in a less top-down way and left to local governments to experiment and find the best solutions. China's approach is less ideological than maybe we would like and more practical, result-focused.

In addition to the general trend beginning in the late 1980s of decentralizing and delegating responsibilities to local governments, higher education in particular is a field where China has experienced a real revolution over the past 30-40 years, with an explosive growth in the number of students each year, and that can be hard for a government to deal with in a country as big as China while still maintaining high academic standards that let them compete internationally. For comparison:

China produces more STEM graduates each year than the entire Western world combined, and currently graduates about 12 million people each year in total, and yet its per capita GDP, even adjusted for PPP, is still lower than that of most European countries. So there is a huge amount of competition for a still not that high number of higher education spots considering the immense population size.

The way they currently deal with this challenge is by providing a lot of grants and scholarship programs for citizens from lower socio-economic or ethnic minority backgrounds, while letting those who can afford it pay their own tuition. Also, compared with other tuition systems it is still relatively cheap, because universities also receive extensive public subsidies, and because the vast majority of the system is essentially state run.

Here's a 2018 research paper on how financing of higher education in China has changed over the years: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325171750_Higher_Education_Financing_in_China

As with everything in China if the current system starts to no longer be fit for purpose they will adapt and change. I can definitely foresee them going toward a tuition free model like some of the European countries if the current model begins to cause social issues, or impedes their technological and scientific advancement. I am definitely all for it, but China tends to be very conservative when it comes to making major changes when there is not a pressing need for them.

[–] darkernations@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 3 days ago

Thank you for this post/comment and sharing that study.

[–] WilliamA@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Alright, makes sense. Don't agree with the conservative approach, but I understand why. Thanks.

[–] cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml 33 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Neither do i, for the record. But we have to acknowledge that we are not in their position, we don't have all the facts available, we don't have all the data they do, we are not privy to their internal discussions, and so we shouldn't think that we know better than them how they should run their country. If we did that, would we be any better than the western chauvinists who want to dictate that every country should adopt our liberal model?

We can only judge by looking at the results, and so far, looking at where China is now vs where it was 40 years ago, the results are not just good, they are amazing. This doesn't mean there aren't significant problems and contradictions within China, partly as a result of the very same policies which got them to where they are today. Sooner or later these contradictions will have to be resolved. How, i don't know. That's for them to figure out.

[–] Commiejones@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 3 days ago

Good posts.

[–] Soot@hexbear.net 36 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Again, it's very hard to see the inner workings of China from our viewpoint, but one could definitely argue that they're in the process of doing it. I think it was nary a year ago they passed a major law that mandates worker-elected board members for swathes of companies, and many more similar reforms that increase worker control over workplaces. They'll probably spend years enforcing and setting all that up. If they do continue with changes like that, then they're undeniably moving away from private sector control and toward a worker-controlled economy.

China is the only country of its kind, it has no peers to meaningfully compare itself to, so I daresay any fast, radical changes would be a foolish high-risk move that risks collapsing the socialist project globally. The west stands ready to maximally exploit the slightest crack at the drop of a hat, so it can't risk showing any weakness.

But thankfully, it doesn't live under bourgeois democracy, it actually can make progress through incremental, gradual change, and there's definitely an argument to be made that it is doing exactly that.

[–] randomquery@hexbear.net 26 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Here is a report discussing the trend of public sector gaining ground vs private sector in China:

https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/2024/chinas-private-sector-has-lost-ground-state-sector-has-gained-share-among

[–] Soot@hexbear.net 21 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Those graphs are interesting. How does state ownership grow that quickly over that short a time? Are they just pouring money into nationalising industries? Massively growing state ones? Seizing bad 'uns? All of the above?

Given the government has been pretty stable under Xi's premiership for that whole period, it must be something circumstantial leading to that heel turn. My best guess is just the realisation that state companies are outcompeting global private ones at every turn now. Very welcome whatever the actual cause.

Also, funny article.

The authorities' stance since 2020, including regulatory tightening and zero-COVID lockdowns, appear to have inflicted long-lasting damage to China's private economy, the dynamism of which was a defining feature of its economic miracle in the past four decades. Nearly 20 months into China's COVID reopening, the private sector has yet to bounce back, despite many pro-private business utterances and gestures from China's leadership. In sum, the findings here corroborate the view that China continues to suffer from "economic long COVID."

"The fact that China's economy is significantly growing with unparalleled state ownership despite COVID, while the private sector withers, just shows how the private sector is the cause of China's 'economic miracle' and that continued, consistent massive state-led economic success just shows how bad the economy now is!!"

[–] randomquery@hexbear.net 2 points 1 day ago

Those graphs are interesting. How does state ownership grow that quickly over that short a time? Are they just pouring money into nationalising industries? Massively growing state ones? Seizing bad 'uns? All of the above?

To be honest I am not sure. Wish they would have some explanation in this report but I couldn't find anything.

[–] Eiren@lemmygrad.ml 37 points 3 days ago

Capitalists will never admit the public sector is more efficient, and individualists will never admit collectivism is a superior survival strategy. It would destroy their ego if they even acknowledged it.

[–] Jarmund@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 3 days ago

https://kritikpunkt.com/en/2025/07/21/on-socialism-in-china-2/

This article gives a materialist history analysis of China. An amazing read.