No it cannot because communism by definition must be a classless society. If there is a group above others that controls the state, it is no longer classless, and therefore not communist.
And you know, the name derives from communal, so no communal ownership = no communism.
Generally speaking Marxists and those operating on schools of thought derived or related to Marxism use Marx’s original definition of ‘Communism’ as the end goal of a stateless society, with a socialist state as the necessary intermediate point. This unfortunately gets muddled when people say “I’m a Communist” (meaning I’m forming a socialist state to ACHIEVE communism) and just end up forming a socialist (or ‘socialist’) state.
Countries can have multiple different systems in place. China for example, is an authoritarian communist state.
Communism by definition cannot be authoritarian. So no, China is not an authoritarian communist state, it’s just a an authoritarian state.
The only way for China to be communist is to give all people direct communal ownership of goods and services.
Communism can be authoritarian, though, as it has been in history.
What’s your basis for this definition?
No it cannot because communism by definition must be a classless society. If there is a group above others that controls the state, it is no longer classless, and therefore not communist.
And you know, the name derives from communal, so no communal ownership = no communism.
Again, what’s your basis for this definition?
Generally speaking Marxists and those operating on schools of thought derived or related to Marxism use Marx’s original definition of ‘Communism’ as the end goal of a stateless society, with a socialist state as the necessary intermediate point. This unfortunately gets muddled when people say “I’m a Communist” (meaning I’m forming a socialist state to ACHIEVE communism) and just end up forming a socialist (or ‘socialist’) state.
I just told you.