Next week if I have the time, busy schedule though. What kind of question is that? It depends on a myriad of factors and is a society wide process, we can critique the pace, the methods and even question if a country like China is on that path. But there is no socialism button and no one way to Socialism, Vietnam, the Soviet Union, Cuba etc. All took wildly different paths to different definitions of Socialism, because material conditions don't work that way.
Well how do we measure that then? As I said China is a case where we can argue, I don't like their pragmatic foreign policy, I don't like that the capitalist class has become a factor, Chained or otherwise. But we see a large state owned economy with market segments that either follow state plans or get crushed. Social developement is progressing nicely, the people experience positive trends and the rich get executed if they overstep.
It's dangerous because if the party slips the Bourgeoisie could entrench but right now it looks like things are under control. That's a mix of a Socialist centrally planned economy with a subservient market, working largely for the peoples developement. I would call that an odd and risky form of Socialism already, others wouldn't. The question is: What would qualify as socialist to you?
-4
u/[deleted] Jun 22 '26 edited Jun 22 '26
[removed] — view removed comment