sci.research.careers

On Sat, 1 Sep 2007, morrisjcroy@ wrote:

>> I'm not sure it was a total failure. China is evolving. Russia is back
>> pedalling towards "govt control." You have to look at the criteria and ask
>> people what tradeoffs they prefer. Europe is substantially "socialist" and
>> has been "stable" for, like, 100-150 years. the USA, "non-socialist" had
>> its slump during the Great Depression as well as many earlier depressions
>> as recorded in economic history.
>
> Some folks will argue that America is socialistic in many ways, such
> as: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac,
> Federal Reserve Bank, Department of Education, National Science
> Foundation, etc ...

All comparatively recent, too.

>> The only time you can talk about a
>> "failure" is if there is a massive and sudden "regime change" (such as
>> Castro in Cuba, 1917 in Russia, 1949 in China, etc). China is interesting
>> since it calls itself communist, even today, is totalitarian, and yet has
>> had a whole string of reforms going back even into the 1950s. Would you
>> say communism in China has failed? Or, is it "reverse-Marxism"?
>
> The Marxist style collective farms ended up as total failures in the
> end in many communist countries. Many were producing less food, than
> before collectivization. Even the Israeli kibbutz collective farms
> have been falling out of favor.

No argument there.

> The Chinese cultural revolution was a huge step backwards in almost
> every aspect.

That was in the EARLY history of the reforms. Starting around mid 1980s
Most of the reforms were geared to growth, industrialiszation, trade, and
makein money. And, look at them run with it. It was maybe over the last
few months that they expanded private ownership, too. Like it or not, they
are going to be a force to be reckoned with. Actually, they already are.

> /wiki/Cultural_revolution
>
> These days China seems to be only "communism" in name only.
>
>