based
the necessity of this to develop rapidly and compete with western capitalist interests
This ignores that it’s entirely possible to develop under a planned economy. It’s not a necessity to embrace capitalism to get development especially as we’re at/past the end of global capitalism as a force that can develop the productive forces.
Also saying that the pros outweigh the cons is not to say the cons don’t exist. Among the cons of capitalism is the exploitation of workers (as a feature, really), and surely you explicitly take this into account?
I think everyone knows the cons exist. i dont mean to be harsh but you’re not the only person in the world who’s ever thought about this or reached some sort of conclusion no one else has ever been able to. Unless you’ve spent years of your life studying China and the many complexities of its past and present and have a deep understanding of its society and economy, I would wager some humility is probably needed here and beseech some trust on the comrades in China who are well aware of all this and much more at a much more fundamental level than you or I ever could be. I’m not sure arguments on an online forum are conducive towards much other than giving people migraines.
Unless you’ve spent years of your life studying China and the many complexities of its past and present and have a deep understanding of its society and economy
Lol. I’m not even making points about China above I’m making general points about planned economies as vehicles for development and about capitalism as a set of social and economic relationships that involves the exploitation of a working class by an owning class. Unless you’re saying that China is such a “complex” place that capitalism functions against its nature there, clearly this is bullshit.
