this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2025
840 points (95.0% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
2515 readers
690 users here now
A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.
RULES:
1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.
2 No Trolling
3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.
5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.
6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc. This includes instance shaming.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
To be fair, China's high speed rail network has also grown so quickly because there are no public consultations or similar. They just build it, the people be damned. If you don't have a democracy, that works. But I would rather live in a democracy than an authoritarian state (at the same time, I'm glad I'm not living in the crumbling democracy that is the US).
Of course, what Elon is saying is total BS, and the US could have started much earlier - or, that is, improved the north east corridor and used that experience to bring more high speed rail to the US much earlier. But anyway...
Next four largest high speed rail networks are in Spain, Japan, France, and Germany... which might not be perfect democracies, but are certainly far from the worst.
Democracy isn't the problem, and you certainly don't need to be a dictatorship to get things done.
Germany is outright helping to perpetrate a modern Holocaust. They are a terrible democracy
The US has a population density of 37 people per square kilometer, the EU is 106, which is three times higher. China is 147 people per square kilometer.
By distance, those European rail networks are also tiny compared to what's needed in the US.
A rail line from Seattle-Portland-San Francisco-Los Angeles alone would be longer than the entire highspeed rail system in Germany, and only connect 21 million people across those metro areas, half of which are in LA.
The German network covers around 60 million people in the Metro areas it covers.
LA to New York by rail is the same distance as the entirety of Spain's rail system, and would have an even shittier coverage ratio. Not to mention even a direct trip would still take 14-16 HOURS, where a flight takes 6ish + a couple at the airport waiting for less than $100 return on a budget airline. Why the fuck would anyone take the train? Even if the train was free, it wouldn't be worth it for anyone conducting business between those two places.
When distances get large, high-speed rail gets crushed by airplanes. The infrastructure for high speed rail is just too fucking expensive unless you're moving absolutely massive numbers of people around.
The US will never have true high speed rail because they would rather deliver maximum profit to shareholders than acturally improve anything, thats why in a decade from now China will probrally still have a pretty good standard of living while the US will become a fascist undeveloped hellhole.
They're going to be laying track in California in 2026. The roadway has been completed for 170 miles, and the environmental impacts completed for the entire phase one.
It's slow and expensive, but it's happening.
Sure they will. Any day now, right?
They just recently approved (November 26) the 3.5 billion USD RFP for track and systems, and the rail head for it is finally complete. So sometime in 2026 they will start laying track.
The concept that a purely "authoritarian" state would build a widely beneficial and affordable public transportation system is an oxymoron. China built it because their railways were aging and they needed a new railsystem.
So China didn't consult EVERY affected person or NGOs. But even in America, the govt does that and then just ignores all the feedback and does what they want anyway as long as there was a way for someone to make more money.
How is that an oxymoron? An authoritarian government isn't excluded from doing good things. Most authoritarian governments have done some good, it's just not an excuse for the authoritarianism or whatever else those respective governments are up to.
And take a closer look at California high speed rail. Public consultations have factored into how things are/were planned. It's far from ideal, and especially in the US there are plenty of problems (take a look at Europe for better examples, even though they're far from perfect). And at least in the US, there are elections that, as very imperfect as they are, the citizens still (emphasis on still) have a certain say as to how things are running.
I mean, yeah, working in the transit branch, I would love to ram things through the way they do in China - it would make my job way easier and I've had colleagues fantasize about it, but in the whole of things, I am glad that the people still hold a certain amount of power here. Unchecked power is never a good thing.
China has a higher sense of representative government than the US does.
BuT aT wHaT cOsT
The US allows for eminent domain as well, no?
Most countries have a form of eminent domain, that isn't an indicator for authoritarianism in and of itself. What's relevant is the checks and balances that are applied, and if they're effectively applied.
IE: it's only authoritarian when non-westeners do it
Yes, but it’s a bureaucratic process that involves a lot of red tape and ultimately has to compensate the displaced property owner. It definitely gets abused sometimes, and property owners are often undercompensated, but there are at least thresholds that must be met.
In China, there is no private land ownership. Residents lease their land from the state. So if the state says a railroad is coming through, your lease simply doesn’t get renewed, and you no longer have the right to remain in your house. It’s efficient and highly collectivist, but discompassionate.
Those leases are 70 years long. China is not eminent domaining land by waiting half a century
"The glorious democracy where 75.000 people have gotten disappeared this year without due process can't build a railway because it's too democratic"
Obligatory "but at what cost!"
And Chinese citizens consistently poll as being more satisfied with their election options and outcomes than Americans. Honestly, when you're at the point where you're saying that China is authoritarian but worlds largest prison state USA isn't, you're basically just giving up the game that you're using the word as a euphemism for "non-western"
Lol did you even read my comment? I specifically said the US democracy is crumbling. Three guesses as to what democracy crumbles into.
But yeah OK, China is a great democracy, go ahead and vote out the CCP. I'll wait.
So you know nothing of Chinese politics or its party
Funny how it's always "crumbling" but never actually crumbled. Non-western countries are full on authoritarian, but western countries are only ever "maybe heading in that direction, possibly" even when they do even worse shit than China ever did.
Why role I vote out the CPC? It's incredibly fucking telling that your idea of "democracy" is an incredibly popular party being removed from power because westerners don't like them. Chinese citizens absolutely could vote them out if they wanted, but the in the western white supremacists idea of democracy, only the opinion of westerners matters.
How about you go ahead and vote out capitalist parties in the West, if they're such great democracies?
"Why would I vote out [authoritarian government]? It's a very popular government!" -every authoritarian supporter, ever
And there is a very major difference between one party that controls who gets on the ballot and a swath of parties that agree on a certain economic principle, that's a false equivalency. And there have been capitalist parties voted out in the West, so even with that false pretext your argument is moot.
Oh, and stop putting words into my mouth. Things I never wrote:
That guy is a known ragebaiter, Fyi
I was wondering, good to know, thanks.
So you're just straight up admitting that you don't care if the government is popular: you don't like it, so it has to go
Lol. When?
I have no idea how you managed to miss the point the completely and absolutely.
Ah. So actually being able to choose policy doesn't matter; what matters is being able to choose between red team and blue team
And the people of China have chosen the CPC. But you'll never accept that, because they're not who you want them to choose. You will never accept that China is democratic unless it's run by people you like.
Ok, I'm done here. No point trying to talk to someone who's deliberately playing dumb
"During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum."
????
???
Lol why tf do I even try to engage in good faith when responding like that makes them blue screen 😂
The climate might be past every tipping point, but by golly the people who own land weren't treated unfairly.