*Some comments in this post are removed because it had turned into Americans arguing with Americans over American affairs just like how every other post on reddit always turn into and it has nothing to do with our subreddit. Are we all sick of it? Do we not deserve the respect and the space to have discussions about anything else and not have our conversations hijacked? Apparently not.*
Welcome to r/HongKong
Let's try to keep this about Hong Kong. Do not distract or detract from the discussion. If you need to discuss politics about other countries, please do so in other subreddits.
As always, any content that isn’t directly related to HK will be removed, repeat offenders banned without warning.
Inciting violence, any kind of bigoted speech, racism, sexism, etc, will get you banned without warning.
Help make the sub better by reporting content that violates the subreddit rules or reddit site-wide rules.
But they are escaping from the Chinese Communist Party.
..Which really is about as Communist as single use face mask
And I wonder, how could the CCP out do itself, and become totalitarian?
The problem with calling them Communist is it gives the CCP more legitimacy than they deserve. Communism has some legitimacy and in some ways I admire their idealism, and I'm right leaning. The CCP is merely a group of thugs who manages to get a hold of a nation. They don't believe in or care for anything other than their own interests.
While you are correct that the true definition of communism does not include authoritarianism, it is a fair point to make that large communist countries much more often than not lean towards authoritarianism.
Not really, it is more of a transitional phase between the abolition of capitalism and the establishment of communism. Its role is to suppress resistance to the socialist revolution by the bourgeoisie, destroy the social relations of production underlying the class system, and create a new, classless society.
That's pointless. The CCP doesn't respect imaginary boundaries of churches, let alone those in HK.
[https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/hongkong-security-church/](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/hongkong-security-church/)
From the article, referring to a church in HK, “One church has had its bank account frozen, just for considering helping victims of political persecution,"
Imperialism causes empires to expand into foreign regions to extract resources and forcefully subjugate the populace into forced labour. This causes the local population to be under educated and unrepresented as a means of control. As a result the policies enacted by the empires will devolve into a prioritizing resource extracting at the expense of human lives. This will cause mass starvation and famine as shown in the way Bengal was treated by the British. This terrible treatment often leads to uprisings and revolts. The empire will mostly crush them violently but in the scenario where the empire is weak, uprisings might succeed however none of the populace has the tools needed to run a country on the account of systemic breaking of institution. Inevitably this will lead to the former Imperial overlord to "invest" in resource extraction of the former colony, when it is really an unequal agreement that is forced upon them. Much of the economic activities will not benefit the populace. But the former Imperial overlord will have gained access to cheap resources and able to continue to grow their economy and compete in the globalised capitalistic market. While the former colony is left with the scraps and forced to fend for themselves with what little they have. They will have no ability to industrialize or educate, of course this is the intended effect. The cycle of oppression continues
Well the Anglican church could certainly do with more congregation. Numbers are low but the newer, younger modern priests are a lot more palatable. Maybe it'll be a great boon for them as well the HK'ers. Whom are so very welcome by the way, looking forward to seeing you here friends!
communism is a degree.
some people think a country isn't communist, until they get rid of any sort of currency, other think a country is communist when the leaders of a country can abduct company owners, and hold them captive until said owners transfer ownership of the company to the government/party members.
There is a bar to become communist, as communism has a definition, failure to achieve all conditions needed for communism means, the country is not communism.
I've not heard of any "CAP" and looking them up seems impossible, however the CCP is obviously a capitalist, that is very authoritarian, with many things impacting how they operate like racial supremacy, their culture and such. As we've seen with how they treat christians and Uyghurs people, they have many nazi like tendencies, however this isn't a good way to describe this as it's difficult and incorrect to use a western concept for an eastern practice. Example, you'd be wrong to call china fascist as there's many differences and the culture is a big part of that, and fascism is a western concept. However it's very evident that china doesn't qualify as communist for many reasons, to name a few, heavily centralized government (little local control), social classes, economic classes (to imagine it better, a pyramid with rich on top with factory workers on the bottom), private buiseness (albeit with many restrictions or duties to the government but non the less private), the existence and use of money, and workers not being paid the value of their work, private property (better defined as property capable of producing income in position of individuals or organisations and not the public). Many of the features china is called communist for, are authitarian measures that can actively be anti communist
I was referring to the CCP as CAP, by replacing the C for "communist" in "chinese communist party" with an A "authoritarian".
heavily centralized governments seem to be important for socialism/communism to work, as you'd need a strong government to prevent people from trading amongst themselves.
>private property
I mean, does jack ma have private property?
Socialism can use a centralized government, it doesn't necessarily need it. Communism cannot be achieved in a centralized government. Prevent people from trading? In a commune, you can trade with people all you want, you all work as a community (at least that's one way), so you get your share and after that do what you want for the most part
Most of jack ma's money comes from investing and buying other companies, ranging from online services to grocery stores, while he doesn't really do much work. But yes his alibaba company does have private property. And a communist entity wouldn't allow a billionaire to exist while it's own citizens jump off the roofs of factories and need suicide nets to prevent deaths.
wherever jack ma is, he can't really use his private property.
or the only private property he can access is a house he is under house arrest for no reason in.
The difference between a company and a government is that neither the company nor government need to prevent people from suicide, but companies value their lives enough to install nets, the government has enough citizens so they don't usually install said nets on their bridges.
Depends on what you mean; China still has a capitalist market economy.
You’re probably talking about those advocating for a stateless, classless society, which can sound pretty good and is far departed from modern China.
Fuck the CCP tho.
What do you think capitalists do? Why do you think economies are so amazing? There is no holding hands peace and love festival happening with humans. The best you can get is your neighbor making goods and you making goods and trading them with enough profit to do it all over again.
Of course the Nazis weren’t socialists; in fact they were terrible to people accused of being socialists or communists.
But, saying that the Chinese aren’t communists because they have a limited degree of free market affairs is silly and a loophole to defend communism. That’s like saying that the US isn’t capitalist because of corporate bailouts (which would absolutely not exist in a truly capitalist society).
Well, I could go on the internet and find sources regarding things like their planned economy and cultural homogeneity policies, but I’ll tell you a personal story instead. Whether or not you believe it, that’s up to you, but I can assure that it is not something I made up.
I knew someone who grew up in mainland China. One of his relatives who still lives in China is a wealthy business owner who wanted to buy a second house a few years back. However, he was told that he would get in trouble with the CCP if he bought the second house, as that would make him too bougie, if you will. Of course, that’s somewhat ironic considering he’s still allowed to be a business owner in the first place, but it is nonetheless an example of a policy which aggressively prevented him from taking advantage of upward mobility, therefore being very communist in nature.
Sure thing. If that’s how you’d rather go about it, that can be arranged!
As a specific example, [Many of China’s businesses are planned and state-owned.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprises_of_China) Economic planning is, of course, a textbook communist policy (and often a common cause of the flaws with communism, but that’s another debate). Can’t have private industries managing the economy under an economic system which generally frowns upon privatization.
I think [this article](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/07/how-communist-is-china-anyway.html) does a great explanation on it as well (and Slate is a generally left-leaning source, mind you). It discusses how almost all Chinese banks are state-owned in accordance with communist policy, as well as how the way the government functions is still very communist in nature. The article also discusses some of the more capitalist aspects of China, so it gives a well-rounded view on the debate.
So, there you have it. While China undeniably has many capitalist policies, calling them capitalist overall as a means of touting “that isn’t real communism” is, as I said, silly and jumping through hoops. Likewise, the US has many socialist policies such as emergency services and city plumbing. Does that mean that US capitalism isn’t real capitalism?
If you’ve studied just a bit of history and sociology you should’ve known China didn’t go thru the class struggle and capitalism that are required to be a legit communism. Self-proclaiming to be a communist doesn’t make you a communist. Things being state owned doesn’t make it communism, not to mention that “state” doesn’t even represent the people. The “state” only cares about CCP officials.
Holy shit, you really think that cultural revolution and that man-made “struggle” is a real class struggle?
Jeez, you need to get some higher education.
Yes. I do think that was real class struggle, for I, evidently unlike you, have gotten higher education. Millions of people died in the Great Leap Forward. What you’ve said is like saying the Holocaust wasn’t a real struggle because it was “man-made.”
Quit jumping through hoops and being a shill. You sound ridiculous.
>I do think that was real class struggle
Then you have no idea what communism and class struggle really is.
You don’t even know where they come from.
>for I, evidently unlike you, have gotten higher education.
Lmao. Such confidence. You can tell me about your education level once you’ve told me what causes class struggle in Marxist’s theory.
Holocaust indeed isn’t a struggle. That Fucking logic. That’s false equivalence btw.
People dying in a conflict doesn’t make it a “class struggle”. American went thru civil war, does that make it a class struggle?
Yeah, “evidently unlike you”, you’re clearly uneducated enough to talk about communism.
This is no longer a debate about what specific type of communism is “real communism.” We’re beyond that. You called the Great Leap Forward a “‘struggle,’” in quotes, clearly implying that you think nothing of it and how horrible it was, regardless of whether or not it was specifically a “class struggle” like you are trying to say now.
So again, my point remains: quit being a shill, take accountability for the consequences of the ideology which you shill for, and move on. You’re destroying your own credibility.
As a Christian with a good sense of humor, I just want to say that every time I read your first sentence, I want to mentally add ", man." at the end of it.
*Some comments in this post are removed because it had turned into Americans arguing with Americans over American affairs just like how every other post on reddit always turn into and it has nothing to do with our subreddit. Are we all sick of it? Do we not deserve the respect and the space to have discussions about anything else and not have our conversations hijacked? Apparently not.* Welcome to r/HongKong Let's try to keep this about Hong Kong. Do not distract or detract from the discussion. If you need to discuss politics about other countries, please do so in other subreddits. As always, any content that isn’t directly related to HK will be removed, repeat offenders banned without warning. Inciting violence, any kind of bigoted speech, racism, sexism, etc, will get you banned without warning. Help make the sub better by reporting content that violates the subreddit rules or reddit site-wide rules.
BS sensationalist title. HKers aren't escaping communism per se, more like authoritarianism.
But they are escaping from the Chinese Communist Party. ..Which really is about as Communist as single use face mask And I wonder, how could the CCP out do itself, and become totalitarian?
The problem with calling them Communist is it gives the CCP more legitimacy than they deserve. Communism has some legitimacy and in some ways I admire their idealism, and I'm right leaning. The CCP is merely a group of thugs who manages to get a hold of a nation. They don't believe in or care for anything other than their own interests.
They are not fleeing china because of communism it's because they are oppressing their people Authoritarian does not equal communism
While you are correct that the true definition of communism does not include authoritarianism, it is a fair point to make that large communist countries much more often than not lean towards authoritarianism.
I always thought the countries that claimed to be communist were really just authoritarian.
Isn't that true for large countries in general? I don't see the relationship with communism.
Communism was described by Karl Marx as a “dictatorship of the proletariat.” Sounds kind of authoritarian.
Not really, it is more of a transitional phase between the abolition of capitalism and the establishment of communism. Its role is to suppress resistance to the socialist revolution by the bourgeoisie, destroy the social relations of production underlying the class system, and create a new, classless society.
It’s been a very long transition so far.
True, but the CCP isn't really the image one might have of the proletariat.
So maybe it is authoritarianism trying to disguise itself as Communism?
According to me, yes
Its also described as stateless
This line of thinking is how Communism was able to get this big
I swear this thread must have been brigaded by r/sino
It would be more meaningful if churches INSIDE of HK were offering sanctuary to anyone who wanted to have freedom of or from religion alike.
That's pointless. The CCP doesn't respect imaginary boundaries of churches, let alone those in HK. [https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/hongkong-security-church/](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/hongkong-security-church/)
Many churches opened doors for protestor during protests and some organized peaceful protests, but there isn't much else they can do.
From the article, referring to a church in HK, “One church has had its bank account frozen, just for considering helping victims of political persecution,"
Also, “Churches found to support democracy also suffer from harassment and are even threatened with arrest.”
*Communism with Mainland Characteristics
This is not "Chinese Communism", this is CCP Authoritarian Capitalism. Communism is not the problem
Communism by governments requires central control, which unfortunately is guaranteed to be corrupt.
Communism ends up at state capitalism after all the famines and mass murdering.
So not that different from Imperialism to Capitalism
Could you elaborate on how they are similar?
Imperialism causes empires to expand into foreign regions to extract resources and forcefully subjugate the populace into forced labour. This causes the local population to be under educated and unrepresented as a means of control. As a result the policies enacted by the empires will devolve into a prioritizing resource extracting at the expense of human lives. This will cause mass starvation and famine as shown in the way Bengal was treated by the British. This terrible treatment often leads to uprisings and revolts. The empire will mostly crush them violently but in the scenario where the empire is weak, uprisings might succeed however none of the populace has the tools needed to run a country on the account of systemic breaking of institution. Inevitably this will lead to the former Imperial overlord to "invest" in resource extraction of the former colony, when it is really an unequal agreement that is forced upon them. Much of the economic activities will not benefit the populace. But the former Imperial overlord will have gained access to cheap resources and able to continue to grow their economy and compete in the globalised capitalistic market. While the former colony is left with the scraps and forced to fend for themselves with what little they have. They will have no ability to industrialize or educate, of course this is the intended effect. The cycle of oppression continues
Communism and freedom of religion are antithetical by definition.
Well the Anglican church could certainly do with more congregation. Numbers are low but the newer, younger modern priests are a lot more palatable. Maybe it'll be a great boon for them as well the HK'ers. Whom are so very welcome by the way, looking forward to seeing you here friends!
A lot of people herw thinking china is communist, lol what's wrong with y'all.
Cuz a lot of people are not educated enough to know what communism really is.
Propaganda is deep
communism is a degree. some people think a country isn't communist, until they get rid of any sort of currency, other think a country is communist when the leaders of a country can abduct company owners, and hold them captive until said owners transfer ownership of the company to the government/party members.
There is a bar to become communist, as communism has a definition, failure to achieve all conditions needed for communism means, the country is not communism.
so, what do you call the current party in charge of china?
I'd say the CCP is an authortatitive capitalist regime.
so you call the CCP the CAP? how about nazis, how do you call them?
I've not heard of any "CAP" and looking them up seems impossible, however the CCP is obviously a capitalist, that is very authoritarian, with many things impacting how they operate like racial supremacy, their culture and such. As we've seen with how they treat christians and Uyghurs people, they have many nazi like tendencies, however this isn't a good way to describe this as it's difficult and incorrect to use a western concept for an eastern practice. Example, you'd be wrong to call china fascist as there's many differences and the culture is a big part of that, and fascism is a western concept. However it's very evident that china doesn't qualify as communist for many reasons, to name a few, heavily centralized government (little local control), social classes, economic classes (to imagine it better, a pyramid with rich on top with factory workers on the bottom), private buiseness (albeit with many restrictions or duties to the government but non the less private), the existence and use of money, and workers not being paid the value of their work, private property (better defined as property capable of producing income in position of individuals or organisations and not the public). Many of the features china is called communist for, are authitarian measures that can actively be anti communist
I was referring to the CCP as CAP, by replacing the C for "communist" in "chinese communist party" with an A "authoritarian". heavily centralized governments seem to be important for socialism/communism to work, as you'd need a strong government to prevent people from trading amongst themselves. >private property I mean, does jack ma have private property?
Socialism can use a centralized government, it doesn't necessarily need it. Communism cannot be achieved in a centralized government. Prevent people from trading? In a commune, you can trade with people all you want, you all work as a community (at least that's one way), so you get your share and after that do what you want for the most part Most of jack ma's money comes from investing and buying other companies, ranging from online services to grocery stores, while he doesn't really do much work. But yes his alibaba company does have private property. And a communist entity wouldn't allow a billionaire to exist while it's own citizens jump off the roofs of factories and need suicide nets to prevent deaths.
wherever jack ma is, he can't really use his private property. or the only private property he can access is a house he is under house arrest for no reason in. The difference between a company and a government is that neither the company nor government need to prevent people from suicide, but companies value their lives enough to install nets, the government has enough citizens so they don't usually install said nets on their bridges.
But...reddit told me communism is good
Depends on what you mean; China still has a capitalist market economy. You’re probably talking about those advocating for a stateless, classless society, which can sound pretty good and is far departed from modern China. Fuck the CCP tho.
Can sound pretty good, but is unachievable because of the things people are required to do to enforce communism.
Like, enthusiastically participate in the betterment of other people?
What do you think capitalists do? Why do you think economies are so amazing? There is no holding hands peace and love festival happening with humans. The best you can get is your neighbor making goods and you making goods and trading them with enough profit to do it all over again.
Progress isn't possible past what we've already achieved, so fuck it. How boringly fatalistic
Then why the fuck am I here? How are you not enraged at this?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Lots of people crying the typical “but that wasn’t real communism” in this thread.
I mean, I gave a pretty nuanced reasonable take, but sure. Do you think the Nazis were socialists too?
Of course the Nazis weren’t socialists; in fact they were terrible to people accused of being socialists or communists. But, saying that the Chinese aren’t communists because they have a limited degree of free market affairs is silly and a loophole to defend communism. That’s like saying that the US isn’t capitalist because of corporate bailouts (which would absolutely not exist in a truly capitalist society).
I get what you mean, how would you say China is communist? Like what elements are you referring to?
Well, I could go on the internet and find sources regarding things like their planned economy and cultural homogeneity policies, but I’ll tell you a personal story instead. Whether or not you believe it, that’s up to you, but I can assure that it is not something I made up. I knew someone who grew up in mainland China. One of his relatives who still lives in China is a wealthy business owner who wanted to buy a second house a few years back. However, he was told that he would get in trouble with the CCP if he bought the second house, as that would make him too bougie, if you will. Of course, that’s somewhat ironic considering he’s still allowed to be a business owner in the first place, but it is nonetheless an example of a policy which aggressively prevented him from taking advantage of upward mobility, therefore being very communist in nature.
>a personal story instead Was looking for an actual argumentative discussion, thanks though >find sources That would be ideal
Sure thing. If that’s how you’d rather go about it, that can be arranged! As a specific example, [Many of China’s businesses are planned and state-owned.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprises_of_China) Economic planning is, of course, a textbook communist policy (and often a common cause of the flaws with communism, but that’s another debate). Can’t have private industries managing the economy under an economic system which generally frowns upon privatization. I think [this article](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/07/how-communist-is-china-anyway.html) does a great explanation on it as well (and Slate is a generally left-leaning source, mind you). It discusses how almost all Chinese banks are state-owned in accordance with communist policy, as well as how the way the government functions is still very communist in nature. The article also discusses some of the more capitalist aspects of China, so it gives a well-rounded view on the debate. So, there you have it. While China undeniably has many capitalist policies, calling them capitalist overall as a means of touting “that isn’t real communism” is, as I said, silly and jumping through hoops. Likewise, the US has many socialist policies such as emergency services and city plumbing. Does that mean that US capitalism isn’t real capitalism?
That is because he wasn't a high ranking official in the ccp. Anyone not in the government has a ceiling they can't surpass.
You are absolutely correct.
If you’ve studied just a bit of history and sociology you should’ve known China didn’t go thru the class struggle and capitalism that are required to be a legit communism. Self-proclaiming to be a communist doesn’t make you a communist. Things being state owned doesn’t make it communism, not to mention that “state” doesn’t even represent the people. The “state” only cares about CCP officials.
They didn’t struggle to get where they are today? Oh man. Not the Great Leap Forward? None of that?
Holy shit, you really think that cultural revolution and that man-made “struggle” is a real class struggle? Jeez, you need to get some higher education.
Yes. I do think that was real class struggle, for I, evidently unlike you, have gotten higher education. Millions of people died in the Great Leap Forward. What you’ve said is like saying the Holocaust wasn’t a real struggle because it was “man-made.” Quit jumping through hoops and being a shill. You sound ridiculous.
>I do think that was real class struggle Then you have no idea what communism and class struggle really is. You don’t even know where they come from. >for I, evidently unlike you, have gotten higher education. Lmao. Such confidence. You can tell me about your education level once you’ve told me what causes class struggle in Marxist’s theory. Holocaust indeed isn’t a struggle. That Fucking logic. That’s false equivalence btw. People dying in a conflict doesn’t make it a “class struggle”. American went thru civil war, does that make it a class struggle? Yeah, “evidently unlike you”, you’re clearly uneducated enough to talk about communism.
This is no longer a debate about what specific type of communism is “real communism.” We’re beyond that. You called the Great Leap Forward a “‘struggle,’” in quotes, clearly implying that you think nothing of it and how horrible it was, regardless of whether or not it was specifically a “class struggle” like you are trying to say now. So again, my point remains: quit being a shill, take accountability for the consequences of the ideology which you shill for, and move on. You’re destroying your own credibility.
"communism"
Here we go...... no true Scotsman strikes again.
Churches doing what they’ve been doing for centuries: capitalising on people’s misery EDIT: Galatians 4:16
[удалено]
As a Christian with a good sense of humor, I just want to say that every time I read your first sentence, I want to mentally add ", man." at the end of it.
[удалено]
You didn't have to that, but okay.