WASHINGTON (AP) — Communism, President Donald Trump says, is the greatest threat the U.S. has ever faced.
This summer, citing similarly grave concerns, he took the rare step of delivering a primetime address to the nation, accusing China of “sinister election meddling” in 2020 and reviving his yearslong push to dispute his loss in that year’s election.
Even as Trump seeks to decry Democrats as communists ahead of November’s midterm elections, he is rolling out the red carpet this week for Chinese President Xi Jinping, the leader of the world’s most powerful communist country.
The state visit comes as the president himself has increasingly directed his administration to take large stakes in private companies to try to stimulate the economy — something even some Republicans decry as corporate socialism.
Can someone please ask that blithering idiot to define communism?
Would be funny to see.
Yes, although I’m finding it hard to find him funny since he got re-elected instead of locked up forever. It’d undoubtedly also be mind-numbingly stupid and wrong and make me lose yet another little piece of my sanity.
One thing that makes me a bit happy as a communist is that he correctly recognizes that his biggest threat is communism, so he labels all of his opposition as such.
Right after he learns what groceries are and that dumb has a b on the end
I mean china is about as communist as the democrats 💀
I wish the democrats were Marxist-Leninists, but sadly that isn’t the case.
China practices state capitalism, not communism. News outlets pretending that any major government is truly ‘communist’ provide the far-right with boogiemen that enable them to advance their extremist policies.
China has a socialist market economy. The commanding heights of the economy are publicly owned, while marketization is employed in secondary industries for the purpose of rapid development. It is also run by a proletarian, communist party. State capitalism would be closer to Singapore or the Republic of Korea, where private industry controls and runs the state.
This is laughable, Belgium has a larger public sector than China (percentage not total).
You are literally agreeing that socialism is “when gouvrmint does (owns) stuff”.
It is also run by a proletarian, communist party.
Oh my bad Carry on commrade, hopfully one day in the future you will be able to visit the workers paradise that is China. 共产党万岁！
Socialism is not “no private property,” nor is it “has a larger public sector.” Socialism is a mode of production and distribution where public ownership is the principal aspect of the economy, and the working classes control the state. The latter was decided in 1949 with the completion of the revolution, the former is maintained through the aforementioned public ownership of the commanding heights.
Sarcasm isn’t a point. The CPC is overwhelmingly proletarian, and ideologically Marxist-Leninist. These are basic facts about the CPC.
Socialism is a mode of production and distribution where public ownership is the principal aspect of the economy, and the working classes control the state. The latter was decided in 1949 with the completion of the revolution.
I’m sorry comrade they must have forgotten to invite me to this meeting. Glad you made it and can now report to us!
Jokes aside, how is this different than than a large public sector? Is Belgium only singled out because it doesn’t have a “proletarian” gouvernment? You have not definied what that even is. Just because his party doesn’t call itself Belgian Workers Party or something like that is Bart De Wever less proletarian than Xi Jinping or Li Keqiang? His parents were shop owners and railway workers. Xi and Li are both high ranking bureaucrats who are the children of other high ranking bureaucrats. Not one of them, nor their parents for that matter, were democratically elected.
If socialism is indeed as you say large public involvement in the economy and the working classes controlling the state Belgium is far more socialist than the PRC. They even have trade unions, so direct worker representation with considerable political power which China does not have. China has one trade union for everyone and it’s part of/controlled by the gouvernment. You don’t have to be a genius or even a socialist to come to the conclusion that this is a bad idea.
The CPC is overwhelmingly proletarian.
It’s so proletarian it’s largely made up of chinese buisnessmen like Jacky Ma.
Using China as an example for socialism is either very far removed from reality or cynical.
Regarding the definition of socialism being tied to social ownership being the principal aspect, and not simply a ratio, it’s because the commanding heights of the economy have direct and indirect control over the rest of the economy. If you have a few huge and critical industries, but a huge amount of your production by ratio consists of small proprietors and self-employed people, even if the critical industry is smaller by ratio it still dominates the overall economy.
The identification of social ownership as principal is core for how we understand contradiction, which is the key engine of change in dialectics. As the economy of China develops, the economic base for private property weakens and the economic base for social ownership strengthens, because social ownership’s base is in highly developed and socialized means of production, while private property’s base is in decentralized and scattered production.
Secondly, Xi Jinping was elected by the national congress. You are confusing mass elections for the top representative for democracy itself, but democracy is rule by the majority and has many different forms. As explained earlier, the PRC elects local councils, that then send delegates upward. Xi Jinping rose up through this very process to the head of state, where he was elected President of the PRC.
The identification of a proletarian state is largely determined by class background. If you had read through the links I provided, you would know that the CPC is overwhelmingly proletarian:
In 2020, the Communist Party of China had 91,914,000 members, about 6.57% of the population of China. In 2017, about 26.7% of members were women.[12] In 2015, roughly 30% were farmers, herdsmen or fishermen, 25% were white collar workers, 18% were retirees, and 8% were government employees.[13]
On July 2, 2001, Jiang Zemin allowed the possibility of membership to be extended to billionaires.[14] Despite this, the Politburo and Central Committee are barred to these billionaires. The National People’s Congress and Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference also includes parties that aren’t the CPC. 2,980 seats are available in the National People’s Congress, only 45 are held by the capitalist class. The Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference includes the regions of Hong Kong and Macau, religious bodies and non-CPC members. Only 59 out of 2,200 available seats are held by the capitalist class.[15]
In 2019, the breakdown is at least 66.14% working class/peasantry, 28.37% undefined class status, and 5.5% capitalists (the extra 0.01% comes from rounding the two halves of White Collar Management up by 0.005% each). Even if we put all of those from an undefined class status, still about two-thirds of the party are workers/peasants. If we put them as aligned with the working class the percentage would be 94.51%. But even if we were the least generous as possible then we’d still end up with over half the party members being of a working-class/peasant background, so no matter how you cut it, the CPC is primarily made up of workers and peasants.[15]
The CPC does have a small number of capitalists, including billionaires, but they are not in control of the part and are in fact barred from forward progression. With a proletarian party in charge, and public ownership of the commanding heights of the economy, we can see that the proletariat is the class in power. This is affirmed by the state crackdowns on capitalists that divert from the state and try to subvert it.
China has the world’s largest federation of trade unions, as you correctly identified, and since the state is socialist, the state works with the union in an official and integrated capacity. Independence from this federation is a crack that can be exploited by capitalists, so this is prevented to protect the unity of the socialist system while class struggle is alive and well. You don’t have to be a genius or even a socialist to understand that throughout history, capitalists have leveraged disunity among the working classes to sow chaos and weaken worker power.
China is socialist, and it’s important to have a Marxist analysis that relies on hard data and facts, not simply vibes and emotions. Belgium is controlled by capitalists with private property as its principal aspect. Parties like PTB are good, but Belgium is not a socialist country simply because PTB has a small level of official representation. I encourage you to develop a Marxist understanding of China.
For Republicans it’s always just been slang for enemy. Unfortunately for far too many Democrats as well. It doesn’t matter that neither one are actually communist.
Yes, yes, Democrats are commies, Republicans are Nazis, I GET IT, every day all day yes, yes, you’ve convinced me, you win.
Trump doesn’t care about someone’s ideology, he only cares if you’re a winner or a loser. He kisses up to those he perceives as winners and punishes those he sees as losers.
He only blathers about socialism, which he doesn’t understand himself, to rile up his ignorant base and keep them supporting things against their own interests, and to his advantage.
He sees working people as losers.
And screw his fascism. Boycott anything the government takes a stake in. Make these corps go broke.
The more they throw it around, the less it means anything.
Somehow implying that China is communist and not an authoritarian hellscape.
Hellscape is a little much. Depends on your hukou. You can live in a shining modern city with maglev trains or you can live in hut with an unpaved dirt street. But yeah, “communist” is a joke.
China is a socialist market economy, run by a communist party. The large majority of people have very positive perceptions surrounding their democracy, according to the western organization NIRA data:
China has something called “Whole-Process People’s Democracy,” based on Marxism-Leninism. Policy comes from the bottom, is interpreted through the top, and then implemented. Local councils elect delegates for larger councils, which ladder up higher until the top, creating a direct line from top to bottom. This is based on the concepts of the mass line and democratic centralism.
Bad bot.
Why is providing Marxist analysis on China worthy of botjacketing me?
Communism never took away my rights. Communism hasn’t put me in a worse financial position than my parents or grandparents despite more education and training. Communism isn’t funding for-profit prisons in the US. Communism doesn’t cause bankruptcy from medical bills in the US.
Those darn anarcho-socialist commies wanting to give people better lives and dignity!
Ah yes, the two most communist institutions in the world: centrist political party and dictatorship with central planning elements that hates oligarchs
State Capitalist, Feudalist, Plutocratic, Authoritarian, Nationalist, Fascist.
Not a bad start, but y’all can get more creative with it, I’m sure. Throw in a Kleptocracy, an Oligarchy, or maybe spice it up with some Mercantalism. If you wanna get crazy with it, how about Gerentocracy? Anything goes in this space! And don’t be afraid to mix and match!
stratified ethno-centric state capitalism more akin to theoretical fascism. . . something like the state capitalism of Rhodesia
chef’s kiss See, look at that, perfect example. That’s a description that’s pure creativity. Think of it like an expressionist painting, it’s just about whatever you feel, whatever you want to put out on a canvas. It doesn’t have to make sense, it doesn’t have to have any resemblance to reality, just write whatever you feel. And sometimes it’ll look like you just vomited on a page, but that’s just art for you.
Remember, kids, there’s one rule when talking about China, and one rule only: it has to be negative. Beyond that, anything goes!
Words don’t mean anything anymore.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2026-07-09/trump-state-ownership-communist
Its always projection
State ownership in a capitalist state is not communism but state capitalism. China is a socialist country because public ownership is the principal aspect of China’s economy, and the working class runs and controls the state.
China is not communism. They’re State capitalists
The word for the merger of state, corporate, and religious power under authoritarian nationalism is fascism.
I do not get why people still pretend they don’t understand why Trump likes “communist” dictators.
Public ownership is the principal aspect of China’s economy, and the working class runs and controls the state. They are socialist. State capitalism would be the Republic of Korea and Singapore, where big capitalists dominate a strong state that reinforces the private sector.
They dont, if anything china is closest to feudalism. Theres a tight inner circle who controls everything and everyone is subject to them. There are a few lower levels like the seperate leaders of regions but theyre also under the control of the upper layer. Also theres sort of a king in the form of xi jinping. While of course this isnt a completely serious comment, neither is calling china socialist.
Have you considered taking part in the White people try not to push orientalist fantasies about China in regards to parts of our society they don’t understand challenge?
No, your comment is absurd. Feudalism was a mode of production where the land was owned by the aristocracy, and peasants toiled the land, providing to the lords part of their produce, and then making or trading the rest of their product for the goods they needed. China is a democratically run country, where the working classes control the state through a process called whole-process people’s democracy. Policy comes from below, and then ladders upward in the government to where it is interpreted through Marxist-Leninist analysis and applied. This is a form of consensus building.
What you are confusing is the process of democratic centralism. Xi Jinping was elected from bottom to top, he had to work his way up from the local level all the way to the top. Local councils democratically elect delegates to higher councils, and this project ladders upward. At any time, people can be recalled by the lower council. This ensures that the democratic process is constantly fulfilled and renewed.
I am dead serious when I say China is socialist, because I am serious about studying and applying Marxism-Leninism.
