Protestation -

Protestation

2026-03-11 09:44:28

Protestation via Communism

protestation@discuss.tchncs.de

communism

2026-03-11 10:02:55

Boomer Humor Doomergod

Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world

As we all know, the Soviets were notoriously environmentalist.

2026-03-11 13:36:16

ThatWeirdGuy1001

ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world

Looking at all of human history this is demonstrably incorrect.

2026-03-11 14:35:15

railcar

railcar@midwest.social

FFS look up the history of Easter Island. This is a uniquely human trait either. TREES caused mass extinction too. Species running amok is a problem.

2026-03-11 15:19:41

pet1t

pet1t@lemmy.world

capitalism and humanity are a combined problem towards our planet

2026-03-12 00:52:34

zeca

zeca@lemmy.ml

It isnt obviously the problem until we see a solution working out… We can say it looks like its probably the problem.

2026-03-12 01:43:58

Urist

Urist@lemmy.ml

In mathematics we use the term “obviously” all the time without empirical evidence. Sometimes because logically it is, sometimes because we want to do a proof by intimidation.

2026-03-12 05:19:31

Cowbee [he/they]

Cowbee@lemmy.ml

The PRC is using its socialist economy to dramatically combat climate change and improve green energy.

2026-03-12 07:58:04

Ferret

ferret@hub.workersofthe.world

@Cowbee [he/they] tbf the PRC itself admits that its economy is a market economy and not (yet) socialist, but other socialist countries like the DPRK and Cuba are also pushing hard for green energy. We have lots of evidence of the solution to capitalism and its ecological issues.

2026-03-12 08:02:48

Cowbee [he/they]

Cowbee@lemmy.ml

This is incorrect, regarding how the PRC presents its economy. They specifically recognize it as a socialist market economy, and they do so on the grounds that public ownership is the principle aspect. They certainly do make use of markets, but markets are not capitalism. The centenary goals of the CPC are not to become socialist, but to reach certain levels of socialist development. Here’s a diagram from Cheng Enfu, a prominent economist in China:

Image/photo

I do agree that Cuba and the DPRK are pushing forward for green initiatives, but recognition must be given to the PRC for their efforts. They have been providing Cuba with solar panels and electrification, and combatting desertification domestically. Beijing’s air quality today vs. 20 years ago is lightyears apart, and their adoption of EVs has helped reduce noise pollution as well.

2026-03-12 11:04:15

Ferret

ferret@hub.workersofthe.world

@Cowbee [he/they] Their officials acknowledge that they don't have a socialist economy yet. Regardless of what westerners want to think with their black and white ideas, the CPC itself recognizes that they are not presently socialist. You can see this in interviews. Capitalism is not markets, but it is private ownership of the MoP, which is what 70% of China's economy is built on. We can acknowledge their progress while also acknowledging that this is not presently socialism.

2026-03-12 15:30:53

Ferret

ferret@hub.workersofthe.world

@Cowbee [he/they] The table you listed proves my point. You say that it isn't about what is primary or secondary in terms of ownership, and yet, the table you gave shows exactly that, and China therefore being in a stage of capitalism.

I can't find the official interview (thought I'd saved it) but here is a good synopsis:

https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2025/08/25/china-model-zhang-weiwei-interview/

Second, economically, we call it a socialist market economy.

In fact, it is a kind of mixed economy. But many countries also have a mixed economy. But the Chinese one is unique.

It means the state owns so many resources, from minerals to land, everything. Yet, the right to use the land is flexible. It’s very often shaped by market forces.

A good example of why China can be so successful in internet applications, even for those apps used in the United States, such as TikTok, Temu, or Shein.

They are Chinese inventions, because it came from internal competition within China. And after this, they become very competitive internationally.

What's being described here is really no different from any mixed economy that funds certain public services (so, basically every mixed economy in the first world). Only Americans look at the way China functions and think it's socialist, for the same reason so many Americans think universal healthcare is a form of socialism. In many ways, the Canadian economic system is more labour-empowered and people-centric, more socialist, than the Chinese system — and it is not socialist.

Dialectics, materialist dialectics, very specifically is not about principle. It's about material conditions, not ideals. "We have a mixed economy, but we have the people in mind" doesn't make something socialist from a dialectical perspective, but quite the opposite. "At the same time, the private sector, like Alibaba Group, made the best use of this availability of top-notch infrastructure, to provide internet services and e-commerce to the best of their capability" on the other hand, very much makes the economy not socialist. This isn't an argument that can be had. You can't judge the way an economy functions based on vibes; it either is, or it isn't, and China's top scholars and officials are well aware that it isn't. "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" means "socialism in the future, theoretically". Socialism is not a road. It is not an idea. That is, well, idealism. Socialism is a real and current systemization of the economic system that either does or does not exist.

To be blunt, yankee MLs really want China to be a shining beacon of socialism, because they don't have anything else. No other country that claims to be socialist isn't swimming in sanctions that are keeping them down, so without China, they don't have a country to point to. But non-Americans who actually live in mixed economies and are aware of both how they and how China's economy functions, and who aren't blinded by ideological fervour and can examine these materially and objectively, are well aware that China is not at present socialist. We can certainly hope that they will be, and we can admire what they've done economically, but we very strongly need to understand that China is not a shining beacon. It is not what we are aiming for.

2026-03-12 01:21:01

njm1314

njm1314@lemmy.world

Deforestation and the destruction of environments have happened long before capitalism. One could say that the worst parts of human behavior are encapsulated by capitalism, maybe even enhanced by.

2026-03-12 07:17:38

Ferret

ferret@hub.workersofthe.world

@Protestation hey so what is with all the absolute goofballs in the comments trying to "yeah but" this objectively true graphic

Like, ultimately, if you have a problem with this identification of eco-fascism, and you do think "humans are the virus", you aren't a Marxist. Period. You don't have a dialectical bone in your body. Scoot.

2026-03-12 16:59:50

ssfckdt

ssfckdt@lemmy.blahaj.zone

Nothing says “intelligent, rational, empathic human beings” quite like anarchy