No, I think you have some mistaken ideas about Socialism.
China isn't moving away from socialism. It's simply the most successful socialist country in the world's history.
Again, the definition of Socialism is this:
A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
That definition does not describe China. The majority of Chinese people work for private industries where they earn a salary; they do not own part of it and it is not a state-owned industry.
Now, I will grant you that throughout the 90s and 2000's, China looked a lot more like a Capitalist free-for-all. However, it is clear by now that those decades were a necessary transition for China to move into the modern economy.
I was going to say more like the decades under Mao, China was totally socialist and basically the nation wasn't going anywhere. I'm not against Mao because he gave China its identity but China under Mao was the most socialist and it had the least stable economy and least improvements in technology.
Remember that even Marx said Socialism can only happen after Capitalism has boosted society's productivity, which is exactly what happened in China.
The problem with Capitalism is that alongside with higher productivity, it will also increase social inequality. A Capitalist China would have allowed those social inequalities to continue to grow, as American social inequality has grown over the past 30 years. Instead, the Chinese leadership took action to reduce this inequality.
Every economy in the world wants to decrease social inequality without reduction to individual drive to outperform. This is not unique to socialism because social inequality will eventually lead to rising crime rates and instability. Capitalist economies around the world implement measures such as social programs and benefits to people with lower income to try to rectify this. China is immensely successful because single state-control is incredibly efficient when it is properly implemented but the idea of reducing the wealth gap is not at all exclusive to socialism.
From 2010 onwards, China embarked on a journey to transform itself from a Capitalist economy into a Socialist economy.
Most of the things that follow are not unique to socialism but characteristic to modern economies and societies.
Labor and environmental laws were tightened and enforced,
That is pretty much the same as in the US and EU.
SOEs were expanded and given greater roles, especially in infrastructure building.
Yet, they are declining as a percentage of China's economy as China had negligible private enterprises in the old socialist times and but now, private billionaires booming everywhere.
The wealthy were reined in: tax evasions were investigated more rigorously, corrupt politicians were harshly punished (with many executed), thereby weakening the grip of money over politics. After the 2008 financial crisis, additional regulations were created to tighten China's banking system (which are entirely state-owned btw, in direct contrast to the US), and make it resistant to the kind of manipulation we've seen in the West. When Jack Ma tried to get around those regulations with Ant Financial, he was quickly shut down.
That is the beauty of China's unique system; the rich are exploding in wealth and number all over China and yet they are kept under control. Under capitalism, they take over and under socialism, they can't even exist. I don't call this socialism; this is China's unique style.
Finally, who can forget the poverty alleviation effort? Can you name a single Capitalist country that has spent the amount of resources and manpower that China has spent to lift so many people out of poverty?
No, I cannot. China is incredibly good at focusing and getting something done and that has nothing to do with socialism; it has to do with one party control at the hands of a competent party. Additionally, the concept of eradicating poverty and programs to help the poor is seen all over the world in all advanced economies, so that is not a socialist thing either. These are the successes of China's system, not socialism.
In Capitalist terms, a poor person is someone who is too lazy to better themselves.
That's what all Asian parents tell their kids. That's what my dad told me. That's why Asian people don't give money to street bums. In that regard, Asian parents are really capitalist.
Poverty alleviation is completely anathema to Capitalism!
No it's not; look at all the modern economies; they all do it to one end or another. The main difference is dedication and effectiveness.
Then you have the fact that since Xi's ascension, he has made Marxist studies a priority among all 90 million CPC members. All of the policies that Xi has championed follow Marxist principles: anti-corruption drive, poverty alleviation, OBOR, and even the Chinese Dream.
Anti-corruption and poverty alleviation are principles heralded by all modern economies (and even ancient ones) while OBOR and the Chinese dream are unique to China. The Chinese dream is no copy paste; it was painstakingly and meticulously developed just for China. It mainly emphasizes China's return to power as the most advanced civilization in the world and "socialism with Chinese characteristics" which is basically the Chinese hybrid system, socialism mostly in name. As I said, these are the successes of China's system, not socialism.
We have a China that does Socialist things, that calls itself Socialist, that studies Socialist theories, and promotes Socialist ideals.
So how is it not Socialist? Because it makes use of market economy? Let's read the definition of Socialism again:
A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
I would say that that definition is not China, at least not more China than any openly capitalist state. Since you focused on the "regulated" portion this time, I will too. How are China's industries more regulated by the working class or common people than any capitalist nation? China's not even a democracy; at least in a democracy, the people can threaten not to reelect someone and he has to pick between lobbyists and keeping his job longer. In China, the final decision is made by the elites of the CCP, not the working common people. And it's for the best because the CCP has a national plan that needs to be followed.
Socialism can absolutely make use of a market economy, it just needs to make sure that market economy is properly regulated.
Yet another thing to keep in mind is that Socialism is very young compared to Capitalism. Capitalism is around 500 years old, born when medieval European merchants started gaining power over the aristocracy. Socialism, in contrast, was born only 100 or so years ago after Marx wrote his critique of Capitalism.
You've focused on the socialist aspects but I never argued that China was capitalist; I said it is a hybrid unique system so I will point out the capitalist/free market aspects.
The Chinese people are more and more hungry for personal success and wealth. They had given up when China was fully socialist under Mao; now you have people dying to get rich and eager to buy luxury items to show it off. This is clearly a cultural trend towards capitalism.
State-owned industries are crucial to China's growth but they are becoming a smaller and smaller piece of the pie as China's private industries boom and its billionaires sprout, putting more and more wealth in private rather than collective hands.
Wealth inequality has decreased in the short term but actually increased in the long term. China, in its olden full socialist days, was full of poor people who dressed in uniform with a red star and wealth-flaunting was non-existent. Then, as you said, in the frenzy of the 90's and 2000's, the wealth gap exploded due to lack of regulation. Now, it is narrowing back as a modern economy but the gap today is still far larger than it was when China was fully socialist. We still have people working 16 hour assembly lines who share an underground apartment with 5 other guys and we have the rich who eat meals that are more expensive than the monthly salary of the poor. (It's a wealth gap still greater than the majority of the developed nations in the West.) This does not point to a nation moving away from capitalism towards socialism but it points to a country that was first completely socialist, then opened up to the free market as a young economy, but then started to get the hang of things and regulate more and more like a modern mature economy.
In many ways, the success of the Chinese Model is blazing a new path for the progress of humanity.
Yes, the Chinese model, not plain old socialism.
