Additionally, disparity rising is perfectly in line with state ownership increasing, the private sector has rising disparity and the overall wealth is increasing.

So you're saying state ownership is a response to increased disparity, yet the increase of state ownership hasn't been effective at controlling the disparity.

Thanks for linking, though it does reference Adrian Zenz, a fascist that claims to be sent from God to punish China. No, I am not exaggerating.

An ad hominem? I see this response a lot about anything having to do with the uyghur population. Even if some of the information referenced was gathered by a fascist, that doesn't mean the information itself is flawed.

The haber process was invented by a literal Nazi and we still utilize it to produce nitrogen. Whatever his motivations, the information he gathered has all been verified by reputable journalists to originate from internal part communications or publicly released information.

Imperialism for Marxists is specifically referring to the process of Financial and Industrial Capital being exported to other countries for hyper-exploitation for super-profits.

You don't speak for all Marxist, and Marxist don't get to redefine terminology to exclude themselves from valid criticism. Even if everyone accepted this definition of imperialism..... What do you call it when you violently expand your territorial holdings with ethno national intent?

What do we call it when they transfer entire nationalities to places like Kazakhstan to extract the wealth to support the Slavic population? It's a complete cop out to think that redefining a term to muddy the waters is meaningful despite the end results being tragically similar.

Workers do have protections, much better than Americans in many instances.

Source?

The private sector disparity is rising as happens with Capital accumulation. It also isn't at "breakneck speeds," you're going to have to describe what that entails.

The share of China’s national income earned by the top 10% of the population has increased from 27% in 1978 to 41% in 2015, nearing the U.S.’s 45% and surpassing France's 32%.

Similarly, the wealth share of the top 10% of the population reached 67%, close to the U.S.’s 72% and higher than France’s 50%.

Finally, the bourgeoisie in China exists purely alongside private development, you can read Xi and Deng's statements. Foreign Capital was brought in to rapidly industrialize, which has factually happened.

Then why is wealth disparity still growing? If SOE have nationalized the majority of production, how is the disparity continue to grow?

Well, it's because SOE are still profit driven...... A nationalized business that still has profit motive isnt inherently different from private organization, especially considering that most of these SOE still have a significant amount of shares being publicly traded.

How is creating wealth for the state and share holders different from creating wealth for a capitalist and share holders for a workers perspective. There still an inherent motivation to maximize profits at the expense of their own workers.

Large safety nets, large public infrastructure projects, rapidly improving real purchasing power, there's even workplace democracy. Simply saying "it seems as though xyz" and gesturing isn't an argument.

Simply stating there are "Large safety nets, large public infrastructure projects, rapidly improving real purchasing power," isn't an argument. Especially considering there's widely available reports of workplaces ignoring these guilines without retort. On top of that nearly a third of their workforce lacks the protections outlines by the state as they are migrant workers who dont work full time for a single employer.

As far as real estate purchasing power...... I think we both know the extent of their issues within the real estate market.

I don't really have any criticisms about the majority of their large infrastructure projects, that's an area I think theyre ahead of the rest of the world, however id hardly say that's a byproduct of "workers owning the means of production". I'd say that's more a byproduct of a more centralized government .

Real wages are rising. Additionally, what on Earth is a management "class?"

Yes, real wages are rising. But is that a product of industrialization or socialism? Every nation that industrializes sees a rise in wages, that's not inherent to workers seizing the means of production. What's strange is that real wages and disparity are rising in eerily similar patterns as western nations.

what on Earth is a management "class?"

Are you being purposely obtuse, or just can't make the leap in deduction? What do you call a class of people whos job is to represent capitalist in the actual workplace? People whom don't participate in ownership, but work on behalf of the owners to maximize their profits at the behest of the capitalist?

Just because people don't utilize the same internalized diction accepted in your particular political ideology, doesn't mean the information isn't valid. That's just asking for discourse based purely on semantic reasoning.

statement was that Marx was not a hypocrite for befriending Engels, a factory owner, not that they had different views.

Right, but you you said it in reference to class reductionism.... Which doesn't really make sense as there wasn't an established stratified class consciousness at the time.

I honestly don't have a problem with Communism, I think Marx was brilliant and dialectical materialism is probably one of the most important ideas of the millennium. Im just not as optimistic about the contemporary implementations of it, and I think it's important to point out the internal contradictions of past and current states for future attempts.

I constantly see people talking about the importance of addressing internal contradictions, however when anyone points out something like rising disparity or soe having profit motive, I tend to just get knee jerk reactions that are usually based in logical fallacy.

I think you and most Marxist who reflexively defend the contemporary CCP from valid criticism would benefit from a different perspective from someone once very engaged in the party. This isn't a liberal perspective but someone who is upset at the liberalization of the modern CCP.

From Victory To Defeat: China's Socialist Road and Capitalist Reversal

by Pao-yu Ching