Even by western sources, strikes are falling. You keep framing them as “illegal strikes,” and in general seem content on just parroting anti-China viewpoints. If they are striking, it’s because China is bad, if they aren’t, it’s because they aren’t allowed to, etc etc. It’s as Michael Parenti puts it, a “non-falsifiable orthodoxy.”
My point from the beginning is that China does have some strikes, but the context of said strikes is different from capitalist countries and as such trying to use “number of strikes” as a state of worker well-being is poor logic. The numbers do back broad support for China and for socialism, which is why I’ve shared them.
Im not seeing what you are saying represented in the link you provided.
Groups like CLB are saying that the strikes they are tracking are illegal strikes because the official unions are not acts on the demands of their members. Basically the sole source ive found and that you have shared. We seem to have no data to point that says otherwise.
The steelman version of what you present to me is that China has no need for strikes and that all reporting on strikes is false. Implying every group of workers in China are content to live and die in service to States ambitions as all interpersonal conflict between employer and employees is mediated without fail in some other system besides collective barganing and worker’s demostrations of solidarity.
Am i to believe that AND that China a safe place for foreign investment as is also claimed by the CCP? And if so, how?
My point still is that if the working class fighting for better conditions for themselves is illegal the state is not on their side. Which by the numbers it is.
This is just an example of it but is part of larger trend of extreme (worse than the US on rights is extreme) worker explotation and supression.
Strikes are not the main way workers fight for better conditions for themselves in socialism, the society as a whole is oriented in a fashion where this is achievable by reform and referendum, democratic institutions. Strikes can and have been used by western, anti-communist groups against socialist systems, and this is what’s illegal. You’re again falsely pretending the PRC and US Empire have the same economic system, and thus mechanisms like strikes have the same utility in each, but that’s not the case. Strikes are more useful in capitalist economies where the state is on the side of the capitalists.
During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
It’s exactly what you’re saying. Workers wield collective power through the state in the PRC, that is their primary means. Tracking strike numbers isn’t an accurate assessment of the health of the economic system or the support workers have for socialism. Instead, looking at metrics I’ve shared like worker confidence in the system and support for it directly state that people broadly support the system overall.
Your comments about Xinjiang were removed because they were Fox News-style conspiracy theory, not actual grounded analysis. I already linked what I recommend you check out.
There aren’t. The system isn’t perfect, of course, but overall the working class supports their socialist system, and believe it represents their interests. Strikes are largely against capitalists when they do happen, not socialism. You’ve been shown several times that the system is consistently and overwhelmingly supported by over 90% of people, far higher than western countries, yet you continue to hem and haw around that while vaguely gesturing towards the fact that strikes exist in China, as though that alone is a point.
Even by western sources, strikes are falling. You keep framing them as “illegal strikes,” and in general seem content on just parroting anti-China viewpoints. If they are striking, it’s because China is bad, if they aren’t, it’s because they aren’t allowed to, etc etc. It’s as Michael Parenti puts it, a “non-falsifiable orthodoxy.”
My point from the beginning is that China does have some strikes, but the context of said strikes is different from capitalist countries and as such trying to use “number of strikes” as a state of worker well-being is poor logic. The numbers do back broad support for China and for socialism, which is why I’ve shared them.
Im not seeing what you are saying represented in the link you provided.
Groups like CLB are saying that the strikes they are tracking are illegal strikes because the official unions are not acts on the demands of their members. Basically the sole source ive found and that you have shared. We seem to have no data to point that says otherwise.
The steelman version of what you present to me is that China has no need for strikes and that all reporting on strikes is false. Implying every group of workers in China are content to live and die in service to States ambitions as all interpersonal conflict between employer and employees is mediated without fail in some other system besides collective barganing and worker’s demostrations of solidarity.
Am i to believe that AND that China a safe place for foreign investment as is also claimed by the CCP? And if so, how?
No, you’re again mischaracterizing my point. I stated clearly my beliefs in the last comment, and now you’re sealioning.
My point still is that if the working class fighting for better conditions for themselves is illegal the state is not on their side. Which by the numbers it is.
This is just an example of it but is part of larger trend of extreme (worse than the US on rights is extreme) worker explotation and supression.
Strikes are not the main way workers fight for better conditions for themselves in socialism, the society as a whole is oriented in a fashion where this is achievable by reform and referendum, democratic institutions. Strikes can and have been used by western, anti-communist groups against socialist systems, and this is what’s illegal. You’re again falsely pretending the PRC and US Empire have the same economic system, and thus mechanisms like strikes have the same utility in each, but that’s not the case. Strikes are more useful in capitalist economies where the state is on the side of the capitalists.
Removed by mod
It’s exactly what you’re saying. Workers wield collective power through the state in the PRC, that is their primary means. Tracking strike numbers isn’t an accurate assessment of the health of the economic system or the support workers have for socialism. Instead, looking at metrics I’ve shared like worker confidence in the system and support for it directly state that people broadly support the system overall.
Your comments about Xinjiang were removed because they were Fox News-style conspiracy theory, not actual grounded analysis. I already linked what I recommend you check out.
Then why would there still be so many examples of workers effectivally saying otherwise despite the legal risk?
There aren’t. The system isn’t perfect, of course, but overall the working class supports their socialist system, and believe it represents their interests. Strikes are largely against capitalists when they do happen, not socialism. You’ve been shown several times that the system is consistently and overwhelmingly supported by over 90% of people, far higher than western countries, yet you continue to hem and haw around that while vaguely gesturing towards the fact that strikes exist in China, as though that alone is a point.