No, I didn't make it clear. I did make it clear I have a personal experience living in a totalitarian county, but I also read books, articles, historical documents, and many other sources of information I encountered over the years that allow me to know about things I haven't personally experienced. I can also conclude since your only argument now is to personally attack me, you're out of ammo. Which is what usually happens to communist apologists - it's not something one can argue for very long without going dry on substance and having to resort to tricks.
It's not a personal attack, you're still calling China communist and don't seem to understand how things work there. They're something else.
There's more small business than america, by a lot, the biggest internet companies outside of America... I think you've redefined 'communist' into some sort of tautological catch-all.
I do call China communist, and so does Chinese Communist party itself. Only you for some reason try to pretend it isn't. And you do it not by addressing my argument but by discussing irrelevant details of my biography. This is textbook personal attack (check out Wikipedia of you're in doubt).
> I think you've redefined 'communist' into some sort of tautological catch-all.
I define "communist", broadly, as a totalitarian state with single-party rule, where the ruling party is the communist party, i.e. a leftist party based on the Marxist social theory, and with state-controlled planned economy, with all economic and political decisions being made and subject to the control of the state and the communist party (which are one and the same in this case). This describes China very well. What would be your definition of a communist country?
Of course, if we instead use strict Marxist definition of "communism", no communist country ever existed and none can exist ever, because marxian communism is anti-scientific fever dream. But if you follow the common use and include socialist countries which are ruled by Marxist parties calling themselves "communists" (e.g. USSR, North Korea, Warsaw Pact countries, China) - even though their countries do not implement marxian communism (because it can not exist) - China fits. Here is Wikipedia:
The economy of the People's Republic of China is a mixed socialist market economy which is composed of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and domestic and foreign private businesses and uses economic planning. Since the 12th National Congress of the Chinese Communist Party in 1982, the economy has been described as socialism with Chinese characteristics.
Following the common, colloquial definition of communist country instead of the strict marxian one - and noticing SOEs in fact dominate the economy and even the nominally independent businesses are subject to strict control by the CCP - one can be sure my definition is correct. But if you insist on saying "totalitarian socialist country ruled by Communist party" - ok, you can use that one, it's just saying the same with different words.
