State directed capitalism does produce quick economic success, but invariably, corruption and inefficiencies arises at all levels of that model. Look at your own China.
That make no sense. The communist model is one of absolute centralized control, which
YOU asserted as the only way to produce correct decision making, which mean the Soviet Union should have far surpassed the US and that would have led to worldwide communist revolution as countries after each other looks at the Soviets for guidance.
Do you even understand your own arguments ?
It's not the communist model that dictates the absolute centralized economy, it's socialist model. Communism has a lot of forms. For example
anarcho-communism rejects every form of centralized government/management model.
Radical democracy is also another model that is theoreticized by left world view which also rejects any form of unitary management model. Those theories were not in practice, never in USSR or China. One should be really careful when talking about communism, since theory and practice had been very different.
US and EU had Marxist practices in the past and they have still government interventions to economy. In 2009 crisis US government saved bankrupting companies with taxpayers' money. Normally in a liberal economy that'^s absolute "blasphemy". Since liberal economy dictates a form of "natural selection" among the companies, the bankrupting companies and the economic policy should "fail" and the new companies/policies arise from the ashes of the old one. That's why capitalist economies sees cyclic economic crisis in every decade or two (the magnitude of the crisis depends) and readjust the policies according to learned "mistakes" from the economic crisis. However in 2009 US weren't given that chance and the companies and a portion of non-performing economic policies were simply "saved". That was pretty socialist and exact definition of government intervention to economy.
Another recent example in my mind is
Paul O'Neill ex-CEO of Alcoa, and ex-Secretary of Treasury. When he was the CEO of Alcoa, the profits of the company was stagnating. The shareholders were complaining a lot about it. The first thing he said when he started as the CEO was "his primary aim would be decreasing the work accidents". Normally in a capitalist economy the aim should be "maximize profit". However after huge efforts for training the workers and managers for work safety and replacing the old machines that causes trouble, Alcoa also saw a great revenue rise as a side effect because the workers were feeling much more attached to the company and their proposals were simply taken into consideration and that improved the efficiency a lot. Marx also made similar predictions about manufacturing efficiency, if the workers are somewhat "attach" to their work environment the manufacturing productivity will rise. That's what happened in Alcoa and that was pretty socialist.
Since Deng Xiaoping, China is a country that can be modeled as
state capitalism. By definition state capitalism and socialist economy differs a lot. In both economies there is a centralized form of economic model, and that's their only mutual property. In socialism companies that are controlled by the central body does not seek "profit", but seeks to distribute the surplus as evenly as possible. This is called
collectivism and is the main form of thinking behind the socialist economic model. Also in socialist model a community would only share the surplus, not the actual need. What is meant by that is they first produce for domestic consumption, then only surplus is distributed.
On contrary for state capitalism main driving force for companies is just like the personal/private capitalism meaning maximize the profit. State capitalism relies on the same values with personal/private capitalism and they are as anti-socialist as the normal capitalists. Domestic consumption is promoted in state capitalism only if it's profitable to sell the product domestically. Otherwise export-driven economies are welcome in state capitalism unlike socialism.
Underlining the two main differences, between socialism and state capitalism, I also want you to challenge you about the current economic environment of China. China is undergoing a huge transform. State capitalism is being replaced by private/personal capitalism. State owned enterprises in China are currently being challenged by their privately owned counterparts.
Private enterprises deserve fair treatment - Opinion - Chinadaily.com.cn
News above is a good example. Normally when financing, SOEs in China were the favorite sons of the banks and they were taking the lion's share of the credits. However today this idea is being challenged in favor of the development of the personal/private capitalism. Li Keqiang also
pushing for similar policies. Besides terms like
Chinese Dream frequently used by Xi Jinping, clearly indicates that the new administration targets for a Chinese middle class that consumes and pass on to the next stage of development.
So what China is becoming : A single party state that uses liberal economy as it's economic model.
@
LeveragedBuyout @
Nihonjin1051 @
cnleio you guys might enjoy it as well.