Why should we not take the CCP's description of their own system of government at face value?
> Why should we not take the CCP's description of their own system of government at face value?
Because it's a government of lies.
They have to keep calling the system "Communist" because that is tradition. That's all.
>An amoral state calling all the important shots
Help me understand how these statements are not contradictory?
b) For some values of X, or for some strategic Chinese goals related to X, the Chinese government has opinions. They may ask the company to do (or refrain from doing) certain things. When this happens, the owner of the company needs to do as they're told, or bad things will happen to them. That's the amoral state calling shots part.
The lines are not the traditional all-of-society-must-fall-into-one-category-or-the-other capitalism vs. communism, but the boundaries are pretty clear.
what is communist?
Is anything communist?
A Kibbutz maybe?
How about on the nation-state scale?
Was China communist under Mao?
Was the Soviet Union communist?
Castro’s Cuba?
Edit: Any Platonic ideal undergoes distortion when manifested in the material world.
I actually think the No True Scotsman Fallacy, is itself, not a very good argument to make.
We should just pay no attention to what any state calls itself. It's irrelevant.