China a fascist state? - Page 11 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The non-democratic state: Platonism, Fascism, Theocracy, Monarchy etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15151773
noemon wrote:Everybody in this forum does. This forum contains a lot more threads about all these things than about China by a huge margin.
Your argument is false. Everybody talks about that and nobody talks about China and when somebody dares to mention China then trolls cry that nobody talks about what we are talking about for years now! :lol:



Again that is absolutely false, in the west we are discussing all these things openly in here, in the paper, everywhere, we criticise our own more than we criticise China. In China people have no freedom to criticise the actions of the government.

Okay then lad my bad, I just didn't happen to find any forums like that.
In that case I pologise for my lack of information.
I support criticism, as long as it isn't selective. Good evening :lol:
User avatar
By Godstud
#15169895
@Sandzak Islamophobia is rife in the West. Why should it be any difference in the East, where they are probably even MORE ignorant of it?

They are probably cruel because they can get away with it in China.
By Rich
#15170145
Mussolini didn't invent fascism, he just invented a new name for a phenomena that is nearly as old as civilisation. Fascism is just the absence of democracy. Mussolini's regime, Mussolini's Italy was only unique in the sense that every regime is unique. Of course every dictator or would be dictator, must create their own unique narrative as to why they must be dictator.

Charles I and Oliver Cromwell were both fascists, they just had different stories to tell as to why they should be a dictator. Charles I's story was that Jehovah, supposedly the creator of the universe, wanted him to be dictator, because his Dad had been dictator.

Mussolini's fascism was a very vanilla form of fascism. An ethnic group united under a "strong leader", fundamentally no different to what dictators and would be dictators have been saying for thousands of years. The Soviet Union on the hand was not a vanilla form of fascism. It is reasonable to categorise it as a new form of fascism, sharing important notable characteristics with short lived regimes like Bela Kun's and longer lived ones like China Cambodia and Albania.
#15170390
Rich wrote:Mussolini didn't invent fascism, he just invented a new name for a phenomena that is nearly as old as civilisation. Fascism is just the absence of democracy.


A regime is not fascist just because it's authoritarian. To my mind, fascism also means an internally and externally activist state, a regime that seeks to strengthen the nation internally to be in a better position to dominate others. There have been many monarchies which were hardly activist.
Mussolini invented a new name for a phenomenon that was about 2,000 years old, not as old as civilization-Caesarism.


Mussolini's fascism was a very vanilla form of fascism. An ethnic group united under a "strong leader", fundamentally no different to what dictators and would be dictators have been saying for thousands of years.


Mussolini went beyond that or at least aspired to. He wanted to create a great empire, emulating Rome.

The Soviet Union on the hand was not a vanilla form of fascism. It is reasonable to categorise it as a new form of fascism...


In theory the Soviet system was antithetical to fascism because communism is fundamentally anti-state and it favors the masses not a state elite. Of course in actual practice the USSR was somewhat fascistic but in a sense it was more "vanilla" than fascist Italy because it believed its system would naturally triumph elsewhere hence it didn't need to attempt conquest.
By late
#15170393
Somebody needs to google 14 traits of fascism.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."
User avatar
By Rugoz
#15173217
I justed listend to a podcast with a historian who drew an interesting distinction between fascism and authoritarianism.

Fascism is a mass movement that attempts to engage the population politically and bring about a profound transformation of society. Authoritarianism on the other hand is a hierarchical approach to politics that aims to depoliticize the general population and leave politics in the hands of a small elite. It's not nearly as energetic, dynamic and violent.
#15173222
China is NOT a 'fascist' state. It lacks some of the structures of fascism. It is a highly authoritarian state, and it is also... well.. Chinese. It has a unique character that does not sit particularly comfortablely with any of the traditional western political 'structures'.

They are Klingons ! Aggressive aliens that are difficult to comprehend.
#15174235
Rugoz wrote:I justed listend to a podcast with a historian who drew an interesting distinction between fascism and authoritarianism.

Fascism is a mass movement that attempts to engage the population politically and bring about a profound transformation of society. Authoritarianism on the other hand is a hierarchical approach to politics that aims to depoliticize the general population and leave politics in the hands of a small elite. It's not nearly as energetic, dynamic and violent.


Authoritarianism means a nondemocratic system. It can be fascistic but it can also be non-activist politically as described in the quote. Not all fascist regimes were energetic dynamic and violent --Franco's Spain wasn't--but the greatest were.
IMO China is not fascist because, like Communist regimes in other nations, it opposes (in principle) the superiority of some people over others. Under Mao, the Chinese communists were even more egalitarian than others. Fascists were fond of uniforms and insignia which clearly distinguished superiors from inferiors. In contrast, Mao tore the epaulets off of Chinese military uniforms; the soviets didn't.
Also like other communist nations, China hasn't been an aggressive would-be hegemon like the reich and fascist Italy.
User avatar
By Rugoz
#15174367
starman2003 wrote:Not all fascist regimes were energetic dynamic and violent --Franco's Spain wasn't--but the greatest were.


Well the same author classified Franco's Spain as conservative authoritarian, not fascist. But I suppose the transition from fascism to conservative authoritarianism is inevitable.

I don't consider China to be fascist. I mean at this point it seems to be a fairly regular authoritarian regime, where you can make money and have a "good life" as long as you stay away from politics (i.e. be an idiot, in the Greek meaning of the word :lol:).
#15174440
Rugoz wrote:Well the same author classified Franco's Spain as conservative authoritarian, not fascist. But I suppose the transition from fascism to conservative authoritarianism is inevitable.


In a country like Spain, probably, given the strength of Catholicism--no natural ally of serious fascism.

I don't consider China to be fascist. I mean at this point it seems to be a fairly regular authoritarian regime, where you can make money and have a "good life" as long as you stay away from politics (i.e. be an idiot, in the Greek meaning of the word :lol:).


In China, there's nothing wrong with someone going into politics as long as he favors the communist party. I presume that, if he is accepted into the party he can become an official of the state. In a "regular" or conservative authoritarian system there's no party apparatus, statism or secular ideology imposed on the masses. Notwithstanding free enterprise China is quasi-totalitarian, even if it's not fascist.
Last edited by starman2003 on 29 May 2021 11:00, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Rugoz
#15174575
starman2003 wrote:In China, there's nothing wrong with someone going into politics as long as he favors the communist party. I presume that, if he is accepted into the party he can become an official of the state. In a "regular" or conservative authoritarian system there's no party apparatus, statism or secular ideology imposed on the masses. Notwithstanding free enterprise China is quasi-totalitarian, even if it's not fascist.


How is that unique to China? Every authoritarian regime I can think of has a political party attached to it. So you can join the regime I suppose, but I imagine you will primarily execute orders, because policy is made at the very top. The national congress of the CCP for example doesn't decide anything.
User avatar
By noemon
#15174577
starman2003 wrote: But even "the most fascist country in existence" by today's standards is not really very fascistic.


China is really a Fascist country.
#15174581
Rugoz wrote:How is that unique to China? Every authoritarian regime I can think of has a political party attached to it. So you can join the regime I suppose, but I imagine you will primarily execute orders, because policy is made at the very top. The national congress of the CCP for example doesn't decide anything.


This is false and would never work in such a huge country. Different cities have different regional systems in place. Even the metro and ticketing systems of two neighbouring cities are not unified. GUIDELINES are made at the very top, and funding is provided-funding derived from taxation and export incomes (note that the autnomous regions are not taxed-not a single yuan makes its way from tibet or xinjiang to Beijing).

From there it's like school, the provincial, district, city, village officials, (superintendents, principals, teachers, party students) work together to fulfill the guidelines best they can. If they fail badly they lose their jobs and get replaced, usually by one of the other 1,000+ contenders vying for the position from the bottom up thanks to local elections (85 million active ccp members-all can partake, employees of large manufacturers are encouraged to join). If they do a mediocre job, they get reprimanded and get less funding next time until they shape up big time or fail outright. If they succeed, they are given top marks and preferential treatment making their trajectory easier and giving them long term job security and a way to move up. Failure is based on hard numbers/quantitative performance.

Trying to fudge the numbers just leads to them being criminalized and fucked, jail or worse- everyone at their level that wants their job or just below them would squeal to Beijing-and they are encouraged to do so. At the most local level if individual families misreport their financial situation in order to get more free gibs they get cut off and shamed until their antics are self adjusted. See the story of the mayor that tried and succeeded in revitalizing china's ugliest, most unlivable city. He did it by naming, shaming, squealing and then dealing. Failures were used to light a fire under every official's ass in the region and to relocate 140,000 ratty tenants who were shitting up the place.

It's how the poverty alleviation program and the infrastructure programs have been so successful.

Where China dwells towards fascism is at the highest politburo level. Here the key party members run a bunch of state corporations that have a finger in every pie domestically and abroad and which oversee every single foreign entity allowed to participate in the domestic market. Essentially National Syndicalism or soft fascism. There is a symbiosis between the communal worker/academia governed market socialist economy and the big corporate state champions. Xi is literally the CEO of an entity called the PRC. Everything below the PRC are subsidiaries, most of them that wouldn't be classified as state champions but that do exert important economic influence(eg huawei, alibaba BYD) entirely autonomous and only observed to be staying within guidelines. The mom and pop small businesses are just like anywhere else, completely private.

And this is fucking cool. China has cracked the economic code on a civilization level. The ultimate test of this decentralized, hierarchical and yet communal syndicalist bureaucracy was on display just a couple months back when the politburo neutered a man who had control of every transaction of every citizen in the country. Alibaba's fintech antics were right up there with those of large US lobby groups, Jack Ma was lobbying hundreds of city level officials and below, trying to change the financial system from within to further monopolize his position. He was detained, reformed and released. His attempt at unsolicited top down economic reform was crushed. Now he is a good little boy. And there is nowhere to run. His Empire is completely entangled with the PRC, and it is a subsidiary. He learned it the easy way, others have received bullets. Thus proving the resilience of the PRC corporation, it can't be hijacked.
Last edited by Igor Antunov on 29 May 2021 12:52, edited 5 times in total.
#15174583
noemon wrote:China is really a Fascist country.


It is a classical swing, nothing really ahistorical. I have posted videos about this historical phenomenon couple of times. Although there is no easy way out from the cycle. It doesn't mean it is good but it is in inherent problem of the communist bureaucracy if it is not dismantled properly and transitions to more liberal democratic form. (Leninist/Stalinist party model to be exact)
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 16

He is still under checks and balances while other[…]

So the evidence shows that it was almost certainly[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

The claim is a conditional statement. This is one[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

I don't know who are you are referring to, but th[…]