China, one of the world’s most populous countries, improves gender parity by +0.2 points since the last edition of the report, with a 2025 score of 68.6% and climbs three ranks since last year to 103rd rank. China has been on a positive trajectory for the past three editions, and on course to approach its highest score to date (69.1%, 2013). This shift results from parity increases in Political Empowerment (+1.2 points) and Health and Survival (+0.7 points) and is achieved despite a slight reduction in economic parity (-1.2 points). In Economic Participation and Opportunity, while income parity rises from 64.2% to 63.9%, it is not sufficient to counter the drop in wage parity, of –0.3 percentage points. However, compared to 2006 China has advanced economic parity by an overall +10.5 percentage points. In Educational Attainment, parity ratios are maintained with the exception of literacy rates, which show the score modestly improved from 96.6% to 96.9% despite a minimal but overall reduction in values. China’s improved sex ratio at birth has a significant effect on its Health and Parity subindex performance, raising the score from 94.0% to 94.7%. Unlike a large share of economies this year, China’s healthy life expectancy remains virtually unchanged. Political parity improves as female ministerial representation nearly doubles in 2025, from 4.7% to 8.3%, and boosts the overall subindex score from 12.3% to 13.5%.

In general, the introduction of capitalism into Eastern-Europe after the dissolution of the USSR was disastrous for equality, so the data checks out there.

As far as education is concerned, being more educated puts one into a more privledged subsection of society, without actually making them "smarter." Those with privledge tend to support the system, even if it isn't as scientifically logical. The fact that less-privledged people prefer more equitable economic formations is indeed natural, I agree with you on that.

As for "true" capitalism, there's no such thing. Capitalism is capitalism, either the large firms and key industries are public, or they are private. There's no such thing as a "checked" capitalism, the system will always adapt to suit its class structure. The reason socialism is appealing is because it's equitable, scientific, and resolves the contradictions and inherent flaws in capitalism. It isn't simply another "extreme," it's shifting from a privately driven economy to a publicly driven economy. There is no "middle ground" in class dynamics, either the bourgeoisie are in charge, or the proletariat is, and in the Czech Republic that class is absolutely the bourgeoisie. It isn't democratic except for the privledged few, the state bans communism and tries to root out its influence.

[–] swordfish@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Of course there is a middle ground. I just posted it as a reply in one of the other comments. This polar view of either or is utter nonsense. It doesn't matter how you change the rules of the system. Being it "capitalism" or "communism" intelligent people will always find ways to navigate thourgh the current mode (whatever it is)l to their advantage - which in the long run will result in an un-equal society. The goal is to set the rules in a way that benefits as many people as possible. You think that in the past regime there weren't any "privileged" individuals? Now people usually say "yes but his family is rich, so he has an advantage". Back then it used to be "yes, but his cousin is the regional secretary of XYZ so of course he won that competition".

Contrary to what you say the current regime here is democratic not just for a privileged few. Everyone can vote.

Although I am not happy about the law you mention, it doesn't ban communism as you say. It just added communism on the list of regimes that threaten human rights and should not be promoted. Which I kind of get given the number of... executions and political prisoners we used to have here a few decades ago.

It isn't perfect what we have, but it is better than it was ten years ago. And that in turn was better than what we had 20 years ago. And that in turn was better... (you get it by now).

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago

I disagree with your erasure of class dynamics as they relate to the state. The class that is in control of the state is the class that controls the large firms and key industries, the economic base of society. There isn't a middle ground, this is a class war, and the one that has supremacy weilds it in their favor and cements it.

Further, the disparity in capitalism is leagues beyond socialism. In the USSR, the difference between the top and the bottom was around 5-10 times, on average. In capitalist countries, that figures in the hundreds to thousands range, to far, far more than that even. These are not equivalent in any way. Privledged individuals exist in socialism, to be sure, but the sheer scale of privledge pales in comparison to capitalism.

Further, everyone being capable of voting makes no analysis of the media, the state, how candidates are selected before coming to the election table, what parties are allowed and which are financially backed by the capitalists, and like I showed, the state is taking an active role in suppressing socialism. This is not democracy for the people, this is bourgeois democracy, and it extends from bourgeois control of the economic base of society.