Socialism, by necessity, has more distributed power than capitalism
I assume here you mean that this is because the party must fulfill the demands of the citizens and not only of the capitalists.
But if we go back to the beginning I am arguing that in case of thus structured power structures the party and the capitalists are one. So they can use the same ticks that capitalists use now to manipulate the public and answer only to themselves.
No, I’m saying that socialism requires worker participation in running the economy because that’s what happems when you have a publicly run economy. The party cannot be considered the same as capitalists, because this is an entirely different economic structure. Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance helps explain how democracy works within socialism.
You’re again looking at particular similarities, ie capitalists have power in capitalism and the communist party has some degree of power in socialism, while ignoring the economic foundations that each relies on and their innumerable qualitative differences. The communist party cannot “use the same ticks that capitalists use now to manipulate the public and answer only to themselves,” because socialism and capitalism are entirely different modes of production. You haven’t explained how, just equated both by virtue of having some degree of authority.
The PRC was founded and has been led by the CPC for over 70 years. Why hasn’t it become just as bad as the capitalists? Why does anti corruption still reach the highest rungs of power?
It’s almost like a socialist state led by a communist party is qualitatively different to a capitalist one under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.
I assume here you mean that this is because the party must fulfill the demands of the citizens and not only of the capitalists.
But if we go back to the beginning I am arguing that in case of thus structured power structures the party and the capitalists are one. So they can use the same ticks that capitalists use now to manipulate the public and answer only to themselves.
No, I’m saying that socialism requires worker participation in running the economy because that’s what happems when you have a publicly run economy. The party cannot be considered the same as capitalists, because this is an entirely different economic structure. Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance helps explain how democracy works within socialism.
You’re again looking at particular similarities, ie capitalists have power in capitalism and the communist party has some degree of power in socialism, while ignoring the economic foundations that each relies on and their innumerable qualitative differences. The communist party cannot “use the same ticks that capitalists use now to manipulate the public and answer only to themselves,” because socialism and capitalism are entirely different modes of production. You haven’t explained how, just equated both by virtue of having some degree of authority.
The PRC was founded and has been led by the CPC for over 70 years. Why hasn’t it become just as bad as the capitalists? Why does anti corruption still reach the highest rungs of power?
It’s almost like a socialist state led by a communist party is qualitatively different to a capitalist one under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.