The question of whether state capitalism is a viable alternative to liberal capitalism often relates back to how modern capitalism developed over about a century. China takes special presence in this debate because it is the most notable example of modern state capitalism. The proposing side and the opposing side have different opinions even from the beginning where they define the key terms of the motion. While pro interprets state capitalism merely as the control over the capitalistic economy by political elites for the sake of political gain, the con views the term in a broader sense where it includes any widespread influence over the economy by the government. The proposition strongly argues that state capitalism is different from the past in several ways. The government is way more informed about the economy than before, and they have experienced and witnessed numerous trial and errors that help them make wise decisions on the corporations they procure. Also, there are incentives from the government as well. On the other hand, the opposition believes this can properly work only when this is a tool used to mend the holes of liberal capitalism, as seen in the case of India and Brazil. Even China has a modified version of state capitalism where certain corporations are functioning as private companies.