Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I've heard this claim before but I've never seen any evidence.
 help



Have you looked, or you’re just waiting for someone to hand it to you?

The burden of evidence is on the accuser.

Its akin to the accusation that the UK is a parliamentary system...

I, too, can claim that "the spaghetti monster exists" is in the same ballpark as "UK is a parliamentary system".

Let's take a look at a related field: the accusation that Chinese car makers are subsidized/funded by "the CCP". It just so happens that the CF40 research forum recently published a study that shows there the money actually comes from, by analyzing the companies' financial reports. https://www.pekingnology.com/p/oecds-subsidy-centric-narrati... Turns out that they most rely on equity financing or alternative forms of financing (like delayed repayment to suppliers). They don't even make that much use of cheap credit from state banks.

More counter evidence: a new study based on 3+ years of fieldwork, 60+ interviews (with officials, entrepreneurs, and engineers), and rich first-hand accounts, shows that Chinese EV makers rose despite central government's efforts, not because of them. The central govt favored state-owned enterprises. Private firms had trouble getting state funding and even licenses. For example Geely operated illegally for years. But private industry and local mayors teamed up and created an alternative system. They then grew to a point where Beijing was like "ok you guys are obviously doing better, so we will not make a fuss about this and just legalize you".

https://x.com/i/status/2064717100229464188

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/741394

This is in complete contrast to the usual western tropes that state that everything in China is tightly controlled by Xi or by the central govt. In fact, the central govt's merit is in being lenient to deviance and operating based on results rather than amount of control. The opposite of the "totalitarian" trope. All the while western pundits would predict something like "Xi has a huge ego and will never tolerate the humiliation that his plans are imperfect" or something like that.

So no, "of course everything is CCP funded and CCP controlled" is not a given, nor in the same league as "UK is a parliamentary system". If they got the car maker situation so, so wrong, then what else is wrong?

If you want to win against China, isn't your first step to properly understand who they are and how they operate, rather than doubling down on your imagination of who they might be? Know your enemy and all that (not saying that I agree with seeing them as an enemy, but if you do, then you sure are doing yourself a disservice)


Letting someone do something is different than being unable to stop someone from doing something. Your response even implicitly acknowledges this, but then you seem to miss it.

Its very naive to mistake leniency in Xi's playground with constitutionally protected freedoms. CCP "free enterprise" is just mock free enterprise. Like a teacher letting the kids have fun with the classroom business sim, the teacher is still in God mode, and can still intervene in any way at any point to do whatever they want.

All of China hinges on the whims of one guy. Nothing stops him from deciding that all that private money is actually state money, or that Geely's president needs "time away".

That is why it is all "CCP money and CCP controlled". Don't confuse leniency with autonomy.


And yet here we are with the US banning anything at will under the guise of national security. I'm not even discussing whether the national security label is legitimate, or whether your "everything is CCP-controlled" framing is legitimate. But you gotta be consistent and also adopt the position that US companies are "US state controlled", and consistently refer to them as such.

Also, I am pretty confused about your larger point. What exactly are you saying? Is it some variant of "only states with constitutionally protected freedoms are good, everything else is evil"? If that's your position, then where do you put the fact that the US bombs foreign countries at will? And that many western countries sponsor the killing of children in Gaza while arresting people who protest against it? We've seen that western democratic countries, and let's assume they're properly democratic domestically (disputed by their own populations, see Democracy Perception Index, but I digress), can be ruthlessly... let's call it "undemocratic"... abroad. Or the fact that ICE and US police officers detain/kill innocent people and are super abusive. This doesn't neatly fit into the simple "free states good unfree states bad" view. So what is your position in the larger context?

You also completely ignore the part where I said properly understanding China is important in order to defeat it. Do you... not wish to defeat China? Are you contend with merely stating that China is bad? Do you not support moving/developing more manufacturing to the west/US? If you want the latter to succeed, don't you need to have a super good understanding of what makes Chinese industrial policy and development successful? Or are you really contend with merely moralizing?


Assuming you are just naive like so many others about China...

China is a communist country with elements of capitalistic markets baked in. But the capitalistic elements are mostly a facade. Underneath, the state retains full ownership and control of all business. The CCP runs all aspects of the government (including the courts/judges), and is the single entity that decides what directions the country (and it's businesses) will move in.

The CCP, who defacto owns everything and has ultimate final say on everything, has one leader that has the ultimate final say on _everything_, Xi Jinping.

So while the waters of CCP models feel warm and free, understand it's not organically like that.


> China is a communist country with elements of capitalistic markets baked in.

While I get the point you're making (it should be pretty obvious to anyone who's held a newspaper), I think it's important regardless to point out that Chinese companies AFAIK aren't worker-owned or -controlled, so you can't exactly call it communism, either. And they obviously do not have a "free market capitalism", as you just discussed.

It's simply a highly authoritarian state then, I guess?


The companies are all worker owned, because the state exists for the people, and the state owns everything. At least on paper that's how it is sold. After all it is the Peoples Republic of China.

I mean, if that's the bar then the state owns everything in America as well. After all, you don't really own your land if the state can regulate what you do on it, what it can be used for, what you can build on it, and can take it away if they really need it. The state owns the land, the money supply, and regularly restricts and instructs businesses to take or desist from actions.

As such, the state owns everything in both countries, the only differences are to what extent they control things.

I wouldn't even call the USA a capitalist system anymore, the economy is so heavily regulated and interfered with. It's a "managed economy", like pretty much every other nation's economy in the present day.


In the US you can take the state to court and win...

for now

Crazy mental gymnastics if you think the American oligarchs don’t have the final say on everything in America. They’re just smart enough to do it behind the scenes, well they used to be. They barely bother anymore.

Generally I consider conspiracy to be the "crazy mental gymnastics"



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: