How come the soviet union didn't end up like China?

China did that actually, and is turning out much better than the Soviets ever did. `

china eased into a more open market while still having strict gov control

USSR went full #YOLO and got what was expected

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>/leftypol/

Because John Paul 2

It didn't have a surplus of labor, and it completely fucked up the transition process of a command economy to a market economy.

China had a gradual transition and managed said transition under the same authoritative government. Yeltsin's shock therapy literally was a half-assed experiment that was doomed to fail. It completely destroyed the economy and any authority the government had.

His error was that he trusted in free market economics to eventually stabilize and drastically improve his country. He was completely wrong, and was probably infatuated with the "All Perfect Free Market" mentality that dominated the western world in the 80s.

Not saying a free market is bad, but if free markets are gentle and require cultivation in order to prosper.

The more I think about it though the more sad I get. Russia had the potential to be an authoritative capitalist society like China rather than the fake illiberal shithole it is now. They could've made the transition to democracy far down the road when they were ready. Now the future for the Russian people looks bleak.

Because China has abandoned almost all economically communist policies

>implying they had any in the first place
>implying command/planned economies are socialist

The USSR was isolated from global trade just like China. The only difference was that China opened up trade and set up SEZ's to get a share of the capital.

You can't live prosperously as an industrialized, third world nation without access to capital from the west -which was pretty wealth already-. Cuba and India suffer from this as well.

Because of their isolation, the USSR focused more on imperial tactics like setting up puppet states and taking over territory beneficial to them.

>You can't live prosperously as an industrialized, third world nation without access to capital from the west -
why tho

are western dollary doos from venture capitalists imbued with some mystical special kind of power?

Russia had what China hasn't had yet (though it came very close in during Tienanmen): mass protests mixed with fracturing of elites.

The Soviet Union collapsed because elites at the top fractured and Gorbachev and his faction sympathising with popular protest against the Soviet Regime.

China has never had this. For the most part, the Chinese Communist Party has tried its very best to stamp out factions (though it's failing at this recently with the Princelings vs. the Tuanpai).

The CCP is also very good at making sure there is no unified resistance to it. There is much resistance in China but the CCP is very clever to make sure they remain isolated and to make sure that grievances held by certain sections of society don't ever form an alliance with another section.

The CCP learned a lot of lessons from Tienanmen and they've tried very hard to never allow it to happen again.

>former ussr-aligned countries
>being third world

That question is wrong, it should be why Did China not end up like the Soviet Union. Well to answer that question is because after the death of Mao Zedong. The reminding officials reversed his shitbecause he was a fucking destructive retard. They had enough sense to know that his policies were autistic.

The Soviet economy was not always oil exports. At one time, it had none. It had no exports, actually.
Putting out the oil was a response to their inability to get dat hard currency or produce anything else worth exporting.

Because the total value of foreign capital that can be provided is much more than one can get domestically. USD is valuable stuff.
And in any case, it's western markets that industrial third world countries export to, the domestic market isn't worth enough.

The Soviets attempted market reform into the 60's too. Go read about Kosygin.

The difference is one had access to US capital, and the other one did not.

Really. Did it ever occur to any of you that the Soviet Union was meant literally? It was an union of several nominally independent nations, including Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and even more stuff. The reason the Soviet Union stayed together for all that time is because nationalism was discouraged and there was gulag for anyone thinking about it. With Gorbachev, glasnost and perestroika, rules loosened and nationalist sentiment won the day. Russia under leadership of Yeltsin decided to step out of the union thereby in effect destroying the Soviet Union.

China however is not structured like a federal state and doesn't contain any independent nations within its borders. It also helps that China is enormously homogeneous, minorities only constitute around 10% of the total population. In the Soviet Union Russians only managed to constitute about 51% of the population.

China will never fall apart like the Soviet Union did, simply because the underlying national struggle does not exist in China. The Soviet Union in contrast could never end up like China, because opening up politically and economically meant that the constituent nations of the Soviet Union began to demand their equal share of power.

couldn't they just increase the autonomy?

Barely had any in the first place

>the Chinese Communist Party has tried its very best to stamp out factions (though it's failing at this recently with the Princelings vs. the Tuanpai).
>recently
1. Words != actions
2. The CCP has always had factions.

>break up.
into han chinese republic, uyghur republic, tibet, and manchuria? the han are 98% and control the vast majority of china.
USSR was 30% muslims in 1990, with nationalists everywhere and no cheap slave labour like china

China is richer per capita than the USSR ever was

Based Deng Xiaoping saved China's ass.

Even during the Stalin years there were factions in the CPSU.
But those factions were banned, and being in faction was dangerous. We don't speak of its factionalism the same way we speak of the earlier years.
The CCP puts some risk into factionalism. that's what the guy is getting at.

>implying it was in any way ever falling apart

There is nothing I lust for more than the destruction of China.

Fuck chinks.

I don't care.

He obviously comsiders himself "knowledgable" on modern Chinese politics, and yet he makes a massive history mistake.

The CCP has always had factions. Literally before it was founded in 1920.

...

Given that you don't understand (and do not want to understand) the structure of factionalism in communist party politics, I don't think you're in a position to make such judgements.

They didn't have a legendary Statesman like my nigga Deng

>implying chinese peasants tolerate bread lines

read a fucking book

>NO you are ignorant!!!

Guess what political scientists and historians call the group that Deng formed to help bring him to power.
"Recently" is the word you used.

>bread lines for peasants
you're not even trying any more

Culture difference. Because Russians are lazy and won't actually work unless you threaten them with gulag or bribes.

Chinese on other hand will work 120 hours a week for small scaps. They still accept bribes though.

China never spent time interfering with the United States and its imperialism, in fact it made itself essential to the imperial world system in order to be given permission to acquire the productive forces it needed.

The United States coming out of World War 2 vastly superior to every other nation would not allow anyone to gain military or economic power, especially if they were antagonistic. For this reason they still refuse to allow China to buy industry that they freely give to European nations, since China is communist.

The simple reason comes down to the fact that China decided to work with the United States instead of oppose it.

I'm going to quote your post here>For the most part, the Chinese Communist Party has tried its very best to stamp out factions (though it's failing at this recently with the Princelings vs. the Tuanpai).

Might want to read this
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_of_Four

This is beyond retarded. Don't ever make a post on Veeky Forums again.

>"recently" is the word you used
Really? Where did I do so?
Do you mean the poster earlier? The one I referred to as "he"? The one you referred to as "he"? When did it become I?

As I said, even Stalin had factions. But we don't speak of that factionalism the same way we speak of the earlier or later periods. Similarly, there's a problem speaking of factionalism during the immediate period after Mao and conflating it with every other period of CCP history. I don't know if you know, but politics is a dynamic process.

Actually, do you understand the influence of Confucianism has on the Chinese culture?

Sure there were plenty of upstart fuckers like Cao Cao, but the average Chinese peasant usually towed the line no matter who the leader was. Except that one time that Jesus's brother chimped out and killed a few hundred million of them.

But anyways... Chinese have strong work ethic like a Ferengi.

Russians just like to get drunk. The only work because it makes them enough money to buy vodka.

Or is the fact that 50 Russians last month died by drinking shampoo to get high not a fact?

npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/12/21/506440314/more-than-60-russians-die-from-drinking-bath-lotion-putin-moves-to-cut-booze-tax

Slavs at it again!

I assume you're a separate poster, since the one previous seemed to have a clearer picture of identity than I.

Stalin was probably poisoned by members of the central committee, some of whom joined Khrushchev's faction and others ended up falling to his purges of former Stalin-aligned members. Therefore, factionalism under and after stalin was about the same as party factionalism in, say, 1920.
And that goes with the Mao years, too. Mao was forced to tolerate Wang Ming and the other pro-soviet central committee members, so we can expect that later party rectification campaigns probably involved just tolerating them, instead of purging them. It's more odd that the gang of four got suppressed instead of just begrudgingly tolerated, innit?

Well, it is true that russians like to drink. The Soviets tried to cut alcohol consumption multiple times, even during the civil war (that was a dumbass move, among others during the war), and it was always deeply unpopular.

Because they had a very strong Christian culture, so they overcame Jewish Bolshevok Communism.
Chinese were pagans, so thus they are only of this world, as like Communism.

Least Orthodox Christians actually follow the usury rules.

The rest of you western Christians are too ignorant to learn or are too greedy earning interest on your bank account and 401K

>It's more odd that the gang of four got suppressed instead of just begrudgingly tolerated, innit?

Yes, a decade later after HUA GUONFENG'S FACTION and DENG XIAOPING'S FACTION defeated them.

It was full of Russians, they never stood a chance.

>Russia
>strong Christian culture

wew lad

Decade later? The Gang of Four were arrested in 1976, So, decade after, am I to therefore assume that the dengists won in 1966, even with Deng is exile from the party?

Russian would have converted to Islam if you could still drink.

You must be kidding.

Reread the post

The use of "after" depends on your interpretation. Use the one that makes sense.

Elaborate then, professor.

Nationalism.

China for the most part has a long tradition of seeing itself as one culture-nation. USSR balkanized.

Also CIA were actively trying to destroy the USSR but they seemed to calm down and settle for corruption with China.

because it was run by slavshits

Gang of four took power in 1966 with the CR. They lost it after Mao's decision to elevate Hua to the position of power in 1976.

The communist revolution in China had a lot more support and arguably had better leaders and China did not keep the communist economy after realizing it doesn't work that well

So the gang of four took power at about the point you suppose they lost?

>China is richer per capita than the USSR ever was
You're completely wrong.

China's GDP per capita is lower NOW than the Soviet Union's was at the time of its breakup. Understand, that's BEFORE ADJUSTING FOR INFLATION. The same goes for most other metrics of prosperity -- quality of life measures and so on.

China is doing well, but it's been able to sustain such massive growth for so long because it started from a much lower baseline than the USSR. The Soviet Union started stagnating in the late 60s, but by that time it had already achieved a mostly modern standard of living for the bulk of its populace; not one up to western standards, but it was no longer a rural backwater populated by medieval fucking peasants. There are swaths of China that are that backwards even today, to say nothing of 20 years ago. Sure, their growth has been very impressive, but it's still not a fully modern country yet. If you disagree you've probably never been outside the first and second-tier cities. Yeah, Shenzhen, Beijing and Shanghai are modern Asian megacities, but a lot of the country resembles the shittier parts of Latin America more than it resembles e.g. Singapore, Tokyo or Hong Kong.