On 22 Nov 2014 01:15:15 -0400, Mike Spencer
wrote:


Ed Huntress writes:

But no one has a case for the USSR not being "Communist." That is a
political party name, and they were the ones who defined it. As for
lower-case "communist," they never even came close.

I knew a Czech blacksmith who (in 1982) opined, "There is no
communism, only state-capitalism."

Well, they never came close to the standard definition of "communism,"
and whether they were truly socialist depends on which definition you
use, too.

"State capitalism" is a pejorative (usually) that has several
different meanings, but the Soviet Union and their client states fit
the core definition: state ownership, with individual enterprises
operated along capitalist lines, including accounting for capital,
materials, sales, operating costs, and profits, with business-like
management structure.

China fits a different version of "state capitalism," but most
economists agree that it fits the general definition, too. In China's
case, there is a combination of state and private ownership (today),
but with heavy-handed state control of all enterprise.

--
Ed Huntress