• goatOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Which can coincide with communism, see China.

      • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        No it cannot, that’s not communism. China is as communist as North Korea is democratic. Just because a country calls itself something does not make it that thing.

        • goatOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Countries can have multiple different systems in place. China for example, is an authoritarian communist state.

          • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Communism by definition cannot be authoritarian. So no, China is not an authoritarian communist state, it’s just a an authoritarian state.

            The only way for China to be communist is to give all people direct communal ownership of goods and services.

            • goatOPM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Communism can be authoritarian, though, as it has been in history.

              What’s your basis for this definition?

              • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                No it cannot because communism by definition must be a classless society. If there is a group above others that controls the state, it is no longer classless, and therefore not communist.

                And you know, the name derives from communal, so no communal ownership = no communism.

                • goatOPM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Again, what’s your basis for this definition?

                  • PugJesus@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Generally speaking Marxists and those operating on schools of thought derived or related to Marxism use Marx’s original definition of ‘Communism’ as the end goal of a stateless society, with a socialist state as the necessary intermediate point. This unfortunately gets muddled when people say “I’m a Communist” (meaning I’m forming a socialist state to ACHIEVE communism) and just end up forming a socialist (or ‘socialist’) state.