The PRC already has worker democracy, and is already socialist. OOP behaves like the people Fred Clark argued against in False Witnesses, no matter what evidence you show, their conclusions are already made up, and they try to "earn ideological credibility" by using whatever club is most convenient among their audience to bash their ideological enemies. The truth doesn't matter as much as the effectiveness of the club, and OOP bans anyone that expresses dissent against their worldview. It's why OP stopped posting so much to dbzer0's Lefty Memes comm and moved to a comm they could control entirely.

When it comes to democracy in the PRC, we have Professor Roland Boer's Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference. Explaining Whole Process People's Democracy takes time, sure, as westerners are used to bourgeois forms, but the PRC is fundamentally democratic.

Same with being socialist, modes of production and distribution are determined by their principle aspects, ie who governs the state and where the large firms and key industries are controlled, and in China that's the working classes and the public sector. As time moves on, socialization is compelled, and the smaller firms grow to levels nationalization makes better sense at. This progress is dialectical and materialist.

But, no matter what you show OOP, they jump to banning and shit-flinging. They'll try to get you to talk about Xinjiang, the Russo-Ukrainian war, etc to highlight the more "unpopular" positions Marxists have compared to liberals. Rather than engaging with the argument, like they did here. This is because, rather than trying to engage in a dialectical approach to learning for both parties, they deliberately choose to believe lies and half-truths for their rhetorical benefit, and engaging honestly would expose that more deeply, beyond simple cognitive dissonance.