Imperial core drones in the comments be like
It’s almost like socialism works and US propagandists have been telling us nothing but lies.
i always wonder why people act like socialism/ communism or however one calls it should not work or be worse, while capitalism should work.
While one is working together while the other is everybody on their own.
like as if there would be any scenario really where working together would not be the most efficiant
(my comment is not about china)
Right!? If socialism didn’t work why did the American empire spent billions toppling socialist democracies and bombing millions of civilian?
For the rest of the world it’s two shit holes fighting over supremacy
No, the global south is pretty clearly aligning with the rising PRC over the dying US Empire.
Eww
Why “eww?”
the rest of the world
By that do you actually mean the rest of the Western world?
Well duh, the others have hardly any whi- smart people. Hardly any smart people. Can’t help it, they can’t even read the WaPo, CNN or BBC, which are the only news which aren’t propaganda.
Nah… Legit I think most countries
Travel to both China and the US and say that again. I’ll promise you, you won’t.
2x countries I’d never go to again.
Have you been to both? Or are you just so small minded you believe you know everything almost 2b people and the 2 biggest economies have to offer?
This thread is a testament to the years of china bad slop that white supremacist liberals have been eating.
Major props to all the patient comrades below trying to educate these stubborn klansmen.
It sure does seem like people who support white supremacist systems and help push supremacist propaganda don’t like being called white supremacists.
Not sure if parody or serious
Why do you use the liberal label? I’ve been hearing this “China bad” shit from the right for years
And the revisionist has entered the chat… lol Right on cue, mate.
Because the entire US political spectrum fits nearly inside of “neoliberalism”. Liberalism in general is just capitalism+.
I think the world liberal is used… Liberally. I usually equate it in the US political term for left of center (or rather the opposite of conservatives), but I know the entire US political system is hijacked - both “sides” answer to the same overlords
The general, international use of “liberal” used here and in leftist circles refers to economic liberalism, which is favoring capitalism (private control of the means of production), free markets, and individualism.
Yes, the entire spectrum of the DNC and GOP falls under liberalism to fascism, there are pretty much no leftists in US politics.
Wait, I’m a white supremacist because I don’t want China - or anyone else - to manipulate Tibet or persecute Uygurs? I’m a Klansman because I lean to supporting Taiwan’s independence?
Do, like, MLs just hate everyone? Honestly, why are MLs so extremely hostile to people they don’t 100% agree with?
Yeah, buddy. CNN and MSNBC said so.
It’s common for chauvanists to side with the US Empire’s claims about Tibet, Xinjiang, and Taiwan, as well as the framing of these issues. For westerners who utterly lack the background knowledge required to even begin untangling these subjects, to side with the world’s largest Empire against a rising socialist country it has every means and desire to lie about, this teeters into chauvanistic territory. I think anyone trying to get a realistic view of these subjects needs to also explore the Chinese perspective, as well as the global south.
Marxist-Leninists don’t hate everyone, we have a deep love for the working class and a hatred for oppression. The reason MLs can seem hostile is because we have to deal with the same arguments day in, day out, unceasingly. This manifests in frustration, lashing out, etc. It gets increasingly frustrating when Marxist heroes like Marx, Fred Hampton, Che, Frantz Fanon, Walter Rodney, Rosa Luxemburg, etc get passes from liberals due to their martyrdom or dying before being in a position of influence, while liberals follow the US Empire’s line on existing and practicing Marxists, and those who lived long enough to succeed.
That’s very diplomatic, and I appreciate you taking my question seriously. But Dess is a core personality of the Lemmyverse and insulting a huge swathes of people using their platform really puts a lot of distance between the ML community and people they could potentially sway.
Unless MLs aren’t interested in swaying more people to their side and just want to preach to the choir.
I’m going to continue being wrong and harmful because you were mean pointing out that I was wrong and harmful
My petty feelings are literally the most important thing in the world so I will never look past them
You’re not talking down to me. I’m talking down to you. So now I feel better. I’m the adult here. I’m good.
Are… are you trying to shame me into agreeing with you? Does the “militant” in Militant Leftist actually mean rageposting and not armed resistance?
No, they are saying that you’re diverting a conversation from who is correct to whether or not your interlocutor was rude to you as a waiver for disregarding the substance of what they said. You can disagree, but presenting yourself as having not been courted appropriately is not going to be taken seriously.
I do actually agree with you that they should speak more gently. Their current behavior is a maladaptive coping mechanism from being inundated with literally thousands and thousands of Redditors who say mostly the same things and won’t flinch before likening them to a Nazi or something.
If you can be faithful to my position and at the same time make me look like a stupid baby you could very well convince me through shame to rethink my position.
Are you without shame? Can you not be compelled to change your behavior through the negative regard of others?
I can’t agree with discrediting comrades that don’t hold their tongues for the sake of more civil outreach. I don’t disagree with the point Dessalines is making, even if I personally try to go about things in a less confrontational matter. One thing I’ve noticed is that some people do respond better to “wake-up calls,” so to speak, so I let them go and do my own thing.
As for outreach, I do care, I even made an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list, I update it frequently, and try to help explain things in simpler ways. I don’t claim to represent all MLs, but education and outreach is a huge part of our role, and our practice.
to manipulate Tibet or persecute Uygurs
The people selling this false narrative are white supremacists, not the Tibetan or Uyghur people.
I’m a Klansman because I lean to supporting Taiwan’s independence?
Taiwan is pretty much if the US confederates lost the civil war, then escaped to Cuba, killed all the people there, and set up a state. Read about what mass killings the Kuomintang did to the indigenous peoples of Taiwan when they escaped there.
I didn’t make my point clear. I don’t have any strong opinions on these matters I brought up, outside “genocide is bad” and other basic ethics. I’m admitting I don’t know much about them, not due to apathy but due to… just information fucking overload. It’s absurd to equate me with white supremacists just because I can’t keep up with everything going on in the world to exacting detail.
There is no genocide in Xinjiang nor, as the accusation used to go, in Tibet. Frivolously accusing an enemy of the west that it’s committing genocide, the crime of crimes, when those accusations mainly feed into narratives used to try to balkanize that enemy of the west does present a certain impression. I have no opinion on your character, but I would gently suggest that if you don’t have a strong opinion then it doesn’t make sense to go around making confident assertions, as you clearly did in the case of Xinjiang (because you surely know the argument being suggested by Cowbee and company is not that the PRC is committing genocide and that such a genocide would be good).
Your statement on Taiwan is perfectly consistent with how you characterize yourself, however we might disagree, because it was expressed as supporting a side in an issue where there is some consensus on what the sides represent, though obviously I and other communists will say that if you want an independent Taiwan, you I guess want a global revolution because in the current world there is no possibility for an independent Taiwan, like there is no possibility for an independent Tibet, because it will either be part of China or it will be controlled by the US.
I apologize for being too combative… it just gets exhausting for us to debunk the same points over and over again, especially since the US has a near total monopoly on anglophone media sources.
We should oppose actual genocide, like the one Israel is carrying out on the Palestinian people with US help, not fake ones like the “white genocide” or “uyghur genocide” which are employed against perceived enemies of the white/western world.
Not having a strong opinion on the issues of Taiwan, Xinjiang, and Tibet is exactly why you’ve been fed misinformation your entire life on them. It’s very easy to take government propaganda at face value that way.
colonies gang, how are you going to upload your AI brain to the metaverse to avoid your garbage society when the chip foundry gets annexed and a Steam Deck is going for $140K because they’re viable missile guidance systems
just curious what the plan is for the “living in the colonies is going fine” gang
Okay I would just upvote and move on, but you’re clearly baiting with that title so if it’s alright with you let’s have some banter :P
If I say that
- the meme is on point
- material conditions in China are to some extent better than the US
- the US is definitely worse to its own people and the world
- I’m staunchly anti-capitalist
but I also say that I still don’t like the Chinese state because I don’t consider that (and ML in general) a form of worker-owned means of production (whether or not you agree)
Am I a “lib”?
but I also say that I still don’t like the Chinese state because I don’t consider that (and ML in general) a form of worker-owned means of production (whether or not you agree)
“Socialism is worker ownership of the means of production” is a syndicalist distortion of socialism. Workers should control the means of production, as in their operation should be based on popular consensus, but “ownership” suggests something like cooperatives (or, you know, syndicates), which operate on the same market system and a permutation of petite-bourgeois races to the bottom that we see under capitalism.
The people must control the state, “win the battle of democracy,” and via their control of the state dictate what happens to the means of production. Specific ownership is a secondary concern, though I agree with what I assume your position is, that the bourgeoisie have been granted too much power and authority in China.
but I also say that I still don’t like the Chinese state because I don’t consider that (and ML in general) a form of worker-owned means of production (whether or not you agree)
We’ve shown many times how the PRC is a worker-owned-and-controlled econoxy, and how the worker’s congresses function in action.
If you don’t consider any actually existing country that’s trying to build socialism “up to your standard”, then you should re-evaluate the basis of your opposition. If you kow-tow to every western-supremacist talking point about how Vietnam, the PRC, the DPRK, and Cuba "aren’t doing socialism correctly because they aren’t as smart as [insert western-supremacist marxist here], then yes, you are a liberal.
Can you define what the word means to you exactly?
What word?
Kinda? What do you think socialism looks like, if not the PRC? What about the PRC makes it not “genuine worker control,” or more broadly, Marxism-Leninism not “genuine worker control?”
It’s mostly to do with how the workers aren’t in control of anything
The workers are absolutely in control. If you don’t know what worker’s congresses are, then you should do more studying, and less talking.
Trying to learn more here but the link seems broken :(
You might have to use one of the archive.today mirrors. A lot of ISPs block them for some reason.
Looks like it was my VPN, thanks!
np
🤣🤣🙈🤣
They are, though. China is a democratic country, and public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy. Polling shows genuine democracy:
What would worker control have to look like for you to accept it?
Removed by mod
Compared to the robust system of democracy in the US where corporations buy elections and the average person never gets to see a single policy enacted that benefits them? Is that what you’re comparing China to?
No, the US isn’t a democracy either
No lol. I mean, inarguably the us is more free by and large than china (usually, I’m talking normal timeline USA) but neither is a democracy.
usually, I’m talking normal timeline USA
Ah yes just ignore the blatant counterexample.
There’s no other timeline genius, this is what the US system had been building up to for decades. This is the intended result, not an accident.
You know, Sparta was the actually most peaceful city in Ancient Greece (usually, I’m talking when they’re not at war).
Edit: Also, there definitely is an algorithm that can determine if any other algorithm will halt or not (usually, I’m talking when you’re not feeding its own source code back into itself).
Telling my wife to only judge me by my sober timeline
You’re just talking out your ass here lmao. This is objectively not true.
China has better infrastructure. Better education. Better affordable healthcare (and they are rapidly about to eclipse the US in our capabilities). 90+% of Chinese people own their own homes. China is one of the safest countries in the world.
What freedom are you talking about? The freedom to die on the streets from preventable illness? The freedom to work 40+hrs a week and live out of your car because you are priced out of housing? The freedom to get shot at the grocery store because someone with a gun is having a mental episode? The freedom to get brutalized by an unaccountable police force?
What freedoms are you talking about?
The US is only more free for capital owners, for the working class China is far more free. The US Empire already is on “normal timeline US Empire.”
Delusional
You can’t possibly think China is a democracy for real?
yes we can, because we have actually studied the political structure of china
The PRC isn’t a western liberal faux-democracy, no, but it is a comprehensive unitary socialist democracy. Policy is usually pushed from the bottom-up, and there are comprehensive levels of provincial, regional, and national democracy. They abolished term limits for the presidential position, but that doesn’t mean “president for life,” Xi can be taken down democratically. It’s unlikely, though, considering he enjoys over 90% support.
As for being “authoritarian,” all states are. The difference with China is that the working class is in control of the state, rather than the capitalist class like in western countries.
I can’t tell if you honestly believe the Chinese working class are in control of china. If so, bravo I guess. No point discussing much else
I do, because it’s true, but I don’t see why that means there isn’t a point in discussing. Public ownership is the principle aspect of society, and capitalists are regularly punished for stepping out of line, while the working class has comprehensive democratic structures in place to pass the policies they want.
That’s hilarious
I don’t see what you mean.
Not particularly
the meme is on point
I disagree: they could’ve used real photos instead of AI generated images.
e.g. I looked at a map and picked the first large city I saw that I’ve never heard of, then looked up some images: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Nanjing%2C+Jiangsu%2C+China&iar=images&t=h_
those aren’t AI
Pretty sure that’s a toll booth. They widen to allow cars to queue and then narrow back down to transition back to free flowing traffic. It’s not a 50 lane highway merging to 20 lanes, it’s a 20 lane highway widening into a 50 lane queuing area and then merging back to 20 lanes to continue being a highway.
Here’s one in the glorious freedom country:
(Source)
Is this a 20 lane highway merging into a 3 lane bridge?
But yes, China does have a car dependency problem. Something the government has acknowledged and is implementing aggressive policies to combat. From building full metro systems in all major cities in the same time it takes NIMBYs in America to shoot down a single line, to high speed rail, to literally restricting who can drive on what days based on whether you have an odd or even first number on your license plate. What’s America doing? Oh right, doubling down on car dependency and killing what little alternatives there were and calling people who speak out against it “woke.”
I’ve been to China plenty, they def aren’t living like this lol. Who believes this shit.
That’s funny because literally China is one of the countries with the highest approval of their government by independent studies.
So even if you’re telling the truth the vast majority of the Chinese people disagree with your sentiment.
Their comment wasn’t about government approval.
Do you think a people who were living in poverty and had terrible living conditions would be overwhelmingly supportive of their government? Come on now think for a second here.
The following is just a really odd way to convince someone of something in my opinion.
- “China is one of the countries with the highest approval of their government by independent studies.”
- Government approval is inversely correlated with poverty and terrible living conditions.
- Therefore it is unlikely that “they def aren’t living like this”
It’s also especially odd if you’re mentioning independent studies. Are there not independent studies about the living conditions?
And to be clear, I don’t even disagree with you. I think a lot of westerners are affected by racist/orientalist views (or whatever you wanna call them) without realizing it. It just felt like a strange way to counter the thought process.
I mention “independent studies” because people are insane and will call anything pro-China you say as just Chinese propaganda.
Nothing I was said was about “independent studies” versus “studies”. I get your point, I’m just saying that wasn’t part of what I found odd. I only used the phrase independent studies instead of studies because you did.
Cool story
Viewed from Hexbear: 0 comments
Viewed from Lemmy.ml: 54 comments
lol@that dork who can’t be bothered to read a few paragraphs on Tibet and does the “China bad!” unironically.
They’re also an eco-fascist “leftist,” and just say “all countries are bad” and that “humanity should go extinct.” There’s nothing that seems to be capable of convincing them of being worthy of support.
did hexbear and ml defederate partially somehow?
No, most of the complaining is from top-level .world accounts so they are invisible to hex.
Would’ve been better if real images were used for China
They are real pictures. Here’s another city you’ve never heard of.
Please name the 2 cities on the bottom right of the OP image, then
One of them could be the Tianfu Twin Towers in Changdu.
See, that’s what I’m talking about, there are real images that could’ve been used in the OP, not old 3D renders
I think they are, actually, just blurry as hell.
Middle one looks like a generic cyberpunk wallpaper, right one looks like a futuristic city 3D. The top left one looks fake because of the giant crane
Hard to tell with how blurry they are either way.
What cities?
Pick any city in the Midwest and compare to any proportionally sized city in China. Like just about. Infrastructure is crumbling everywhere in this country while China has built more high speed rail than every other nation on the planet combined.
The priorities speak volumes.
Whenever i see some documentaries about china, japan or south korea, i’m actually blown away. They are in a big city that is recognizable, and then they sit in a train for an hour and land in a city that i haven’t heard of ever, that is somehow 3x bigger. I really wanna visit some day, but maybe i’d just be overwhelmed
Removed by mod
You got any sources for this or are you just racist?
China has more high speed rail than every nation on the planet combined. They have a much easier time traveling within their own country for very little money than say the US. Or do you think the rail is all just there for show?
Case in point here my friend - https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3327402/chinas-super-golden-week-forecast-spark-travel-boom-home-and-abroad
Literally just making shit up.
Anything’s possible when you make shit up kiddo
No I mean in the photos
Houston, Los Angeles and some random yet all the same suburb in the US
Lol dipshit have you ever been to China? The small cities they consider sleepy bergs have ONLY 1 million lol. That’s ten times the equivalent city in the Midwest at minimum.
You say this like it’s an own when it’s actually China flexing on us.
My money is on Detroit for the first one
Recommend this City Nerd video on downtowns with the best and worst parking lots
The images are from Houston.
The parking lot picture is from the 1970s, so probably not exactly fair to compare to a modern city. I don’t know (care about) how it looks now.
China is also in the process of their own genocide.
Not happening. Go ahead and post your “victims of communism” source tho.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/17/asia/uyghurs-muslim-countries-china-intl
https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2021/08/08/2003762216
So the story is that the US and our allies, who have spent decades villifying imprisoning and killing muslims, and who have repeatedly verifiably lied about similar human rights abuses to justify our foreign policy before, are the only ones who can be trusted to tell the truth about the conditions for muslims who just happen to be living in the country which is our single greatest global rival politically and economically, about whom we have an extremely obvious foreign policy motive for lying, but we’re definitely telling the truth this time and everyone else is lying? Every muslim majority nation on earth is apparently only supporting China because they’re either corrupt or too terrified to oppose them, despite the fact that the US has been completely unable to get similar results for Israel with our best efforts? And despite having the most advanced surveillance technology on earth, despite having satellites that can take high resolution pictures of any patch of dirt on earth and an unmatched intelligence network, the US has somehow been unable to obtain any incontrovertible physical evidence of this supposed genocide for years? And you believe that?
Removed by mod
Homophobia / sexualized violence. Banned.
Lol stay mad loser
No, China is not commiting genocide. The best and most comprehensive resource I have seen so far is Qiao Collective’s Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation. Qiao Collective is explicitly pro-PRC, but this is an extremely comprehensive write-up of the entire background of the events, the timeline of reports, and real and fake claims.
I also recommend reading the UN report and China’s response to it. These are the most relevant accusations and responses without delving into straight up fantasy like Adrian Zenz, professional propagandist for the Victims of Communism Foundation, does.
Tourists do go to Xinjiang all the time as well. You can watch videos like this one on YouTube, though it obviously isn’t going to be a comprehensive view of a complex situation like this. Even with all of the real complexities, though, nothing material measures up to claims of genocide.
Removed by mod
You are like a little baby
Seems like the only thing you guys do here is strawman and “whatabout”
where either of those things here?
that just shows that china was investing in infrastructure, while US was investing in corruption to funnel more money to the people who need it the least.
I was referring to whataboutism broadly, and not necessarily in this instance.
that just shows that china was investing in infrastructure, while US was investing in corruption to funnel more money to the people who need it the least.
Right, i agree with you, but who was saying otherwise is my point. That’s why i said this is a strawman. “China bad” comments are due to other factors and not infrastructure. This post addresses the China bad comments with “but look at how developed the infrastructure is” whilst the comments are about completely separate things.
If those “other factors” were legitimate why would china be investing anything into infrastructure? If they could simply unilaterally repress discontent, why would they invest so heavily in the experience of their working class? Doesn’t that imply a
hugeimpossible level of benevolence, in your version of events, to do these things with absolutely no mechanism for the people to enforce it?
“Whataboutism” is a thought-terminating buzzword employed by brain-rotted westerners whenever a relevant comparison is made in which they come out looking bad
Whataboutism is a real fallacy
No, it was invented by br*tish mass murderers.
Tu quoque is a real fallacy, whataboutism is a word used by people who are too fucking stupid to google the real name and are 100% always also too stupid to correctly identify a fallacy
So what exactly is wrong if someone wants to use a colloquial? You’re acting like this has any actual bearing on the validity of my point
Your point has no validity as several other users have already explained at length, my point is that you’re also rhetorically/logically/literally illiterate and should be embarassed
several other users have already explained at length
You mean communists like you? We’re so deep in this thread that no one else other than you guys care enough to be still here downvoting my comments.
Similarly you’ve been insulting me this whole time, but I’ve stayed passive, only wanting to engage with your talking points.aybe you could try being less aggressive for a change.
Yes, several communists have already explained to you in great detail exactly how and why your assertions are incorrect. Your point?
Your passivity is worthless.
I can’t think of any strawman arguments I’ve seen recently from leftists, but as for “whataboutism,” comparison is the basic method by which we can observe what works and what doesn’t. Not all “whataboutism” is invalid, for example comparing the level of infrastructure development in China and the US reveals clear strengths of socialism over capitalism.
for example comparing the level of infrastructure development in China and the US reveals clear strengths of socialism over capitalism.
That’s not whataboutism. That’s just a comparison as you pointed out. Whataboutism is when you address a critique of your position by saying, “we’re not the only ones though”
I can’t think of any strawman arguments I’ve seen recently from leftists
This post is a strawman. It assumes criticisms of China are centred around infrastructure as opposed to other things. Unless OP specifically made this post in response to someone they had (or are having) a discussion with, I see no reason to generalize this as a position all “liberals” take.
So it’s called a strawman when you disagree with someone and your reason for thinking something is good is different from the reason someone else thinks something is bad?
I think strawberries are good because they are sweet. You think strawberries are bad because the little seeds bother you.
Have I committed a strawman because I didn’t talk about the little seeds when I said strawberries are good?
That’s not what i said. I don’t think you actually addressed what i said. I only said this post is a strawman, because OP is trying to frame it like most criticisms of China are based on infrastructure as opposed to other things.
This argument is completely fine otherwise
Thinking people are only allowed to respond to what you say on your own terms is baby brained
because OP is trying to frame it like most criticisms of China are based on infrastructure as opposed to other things.
Just like I’m trying to frame most criticisms of strawberries as based on flavor.
The fact that you don’t like how my argument reflected yours does not mean it isn’t valid.
The fact that you don’t like how my argument reflected yours does not mean it isn’t valid.
Exactly right. I don’t have a problem with the argument. It is valid. China has better infrastructure than the US, but that’s not what the “China bad” discourse is about. It’s really more of ignoratio elenchi.
but that’s not what the “China bad” discourse is about
And post isn’t about debunking your racist disinformation. This post is about talking about good things.
Are you under the impression that you’re only allowed to talk about bad things when discussing whether something is good or bad?
Sorry? I don’t follow.
I said in another comment that if OP was making this post as a response to another person where they were talking about infrastructure, then this post is fine. But if they’re generalizing “China bad” comments and the only response is “infrastructure”, then it’s a straw man, because arguments about infrastructure development doesn’t make up the bulk of “China bad” discourse.
To make it more clear, let me give an example. If i say China is “bad” because it censors media, and you respond by saying “ok, but look at the difference between infrastructure in the US and China—China’s is far better”, you have strawmanned my position because i wasn’t talking about infrastructure.
This post strawmans the whole “China bad” discourse because it makes it seem like it’s about infrastructure. I hope this makes more sense.
There’s no need for you to tediously restate your position. I understand where you’re coming from. You cannot enlighten me to your perspective as a way of making your argument seem less stupid to me.
This post is definitely comparison, though, and not whataboutism. Further, it is valid if the point of critiquing something is to imply something else is better when it can be pointed out that they are similar, the same, or the other is worse.
As for this post, it’s pretty clear that it’s comparing infrastructure in both countries. Claims of “China bad” are ever-shifting, goal posts moving and entire arguments spring up and fall back down, there’s no meme that could genuinely address all of them. Use Occam’s razor a bit here.
Claims of “China bad” are ever-shifting, goal posts moving and entire arguments spring up and fall back down,
Right, but infrastructure is not what makes up the bulk of “China bad” talking points. Why not address the Uyghurs or censorship? That is what makes up the bulk of “China bad” discourse.
Pointing to infrastructure only to refute the “China bad” comments is a strawman because that’s not what makes up the bulk of the discourse.
I’m willing to let it slide on the Occam’s razor though, especially since this is just a meme, but it still feels disingenuous.
Further, it is valid if the point of critiquing something is to imply something else is better when it can be pointed out that they are similar, the same, or the other is worse.
Sorry, if you’re meaning this as a defense of the use of whataboutism, I don’t agree.
Why not address the Uyghurs or censorship?
And when we do this, as we have and continue to do, you’ll still label it as whataboutism.
I’m not ready to have this discussion today
Then why say anything rather than read/watch provided material?
The problem is that “China bad” means anything, so we have to take it at face-value and look at the meme itself for context. It isn’t addressing whatever niche reason you have for not liking China.
As for Xinjiang, the best and most comprehensive resource I have seen so far is Qiao Collective’s Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation. Qiao Collective is explicitly pro-PRC, but this is an extremely comprehensive write-up of the entire background of the events, the timeline of reports, and real and fake claims.
I also recommend reading the UN report and China’s response to it. These are the most relevant accusations and responses without delving into straight up fantasy like Adrian Zenz, professional propagandist for the Victims of Communism Foundation, does.
Tourists do go to Xinjiang all the time as well. You can watch videos like this one on YouTube, though it obviously isn’t going to be a comprehensive view of a complex situation like this.
As for censorship, it’s largely used against capitalists and western orgs. The working class in China need to keep capitalists suppressed or they risk the socialist system. This is working, and China has high degrees of support, over 90%:
It isn’t addressing whatever niche reason you have for not liking China.
That is why i said if OP is responding to someone in particular where this was the topic of discussion, then it’s fine. The meme should’ve been more careful in its language and specified what aspects of the “China bad” discourse it’s addressing. Something like “But they say US has better infrastructure”, or something to that tune. This way, it wouldn’t reduce the whole discourse to a singular and unpopular talking point.
I’m not going to address your other points as it’s going to make this discussion longer than i want it. Save that for another day
You came here fighting strawmen then, ironically.
Two things can be true.
The rapist is claiming his victim is also a rapist! Both must be true!!
THREE things can be true!
Yes, the richest country by GDP, and the world’s largest empire, can be crumbling while the world’s largest socialist country can be dramatically improving and rapidly developing.
China is by no means a socialist country.
The PRC is a mixed economy, with the planned, socialist sector dominant, and a limited/restricted private sector.
Is China State Capitalist?
- The backbone of the economy is state ownership and socialist planning. 24 / 25 of the top revenue companies are state-owned and planned. 70% of the top 500 companies are State-owned. 1, 2 The largest bank, construction, electricity, and energy companies in the world, are CPC controlled entities, subject to the 5 year plans laid out by the central committee.
- Workplace democracy in action in the CPC.
- Is modern day china communist? Is it staying true to communist values?
- Didn’t China go Capitalist with Deng Xiaoping? Didn’t it liberalize its economy? Is China’s drastic decrease in poverty a result of the increase in free market capitalist policies?
- Is the CPC committed to communism?
- The Long Game and Its Contradictions. Audiobook
- The myth of Chinese state capitalism. Did Deng really betray Chinese socialism?
- Tsinghua University- Is Socialism with Chinese Characteristics real socialism, or is it state Capitalism?
- Isn’t China revisionist for having a capitalist sector of the economy, and working with capitalists? Why isn’t it fully planned like the USSR was?
- Castro on why both China and Vietnam are socialist countries.
- Roderic Day - China has billionaires.
- What is socialism with Chinese characteristics (SWCC)?
- How is SWCC not revisionist? How is it any different from Gorbachev’s market reforms?, 2
- Domenico Losurdo - is China state capitalist?, 2
- Did Lenin say anything about Market Socialism, or productivism?
- Vijay Prashad - Is China capitalist?
- Why do Chinese billionaires keep ending up in prison? Why are many billionaires and CEOs going missing? China sentences Ex-Chairman of a major bank, guilty of embezzling ~$100M USD, to death in 2019.
- China cracks down on billionaires - Ben Norton interviews Ian Goodrum
- Do capitalists control the communist party? No, pic
- How the State runs business in China.
- 50% of the economy is in the socialist public sector and directly follows the plan (40% if you ignore the agricultural sector). 20 to 30% is inside the state capitalist sector, which is the sector partially or totally owned by domestic capitalists but run by the CPC or by local workers councils. The rest is made up of the small bourgeois ownership like in the NEP.
- China pushing forward Marxist training in colleges, attracts 1M students.
Removed by mod
i won’t read or learn; in fact no one will bother
that attitude isn’t helping your argument.
Removed by mod
you don’t care at all, yet you just came here to angrily respond 🤔
Maybe spend a bit of time learning what words mean before using them.
I know what words mean. China is a socialist market economy, which is not socialism.
imagine being so ignorant as to think that markets are at odds with socialism 🤣
Cope
The large firms and key industries are publicly owned, and the working class is in control of the state while capitalists are suppressed and prevented from expanding into those principal firms and industries. It’s been socialist since the CPC successfully overthrew the nationalists.
I’m sorry, the working class is in control of the state? I’d love to hear something to back up such a strong statement.
The communists overthrew the nationalists, and since then public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy. Democracy was expanded and is comprehensively surveyed from the bottom-up, and capitalists are kept in check by the socialist state.
What exactly do you want to read about? That’s a broad question, if you narrow it down a bit I might be able to give you a more focused answer.
What does “public ownership” mean? They’re not paying dividends to every Chinese citizen, right? I assume you mean “the state”, in which case I’m not seeing your point.
Public ownership doesn’t mean receipt of dividends, like some kind of massive cooperative. It means owned across all of society. The state handles that in socialism, yes, China is socialist.
China is a socialist market economy, not a socialist economy.
You can’t have a stock market and be a socialist economy.
Socialist market economies are a type of socialist economy, particularly in the primary stage. Socialism isn’t a unique mode of production determined by purity, but just like the others, by its principle aspect. What might help paint a better picture for you is looking at Cheng Enfu’s diagram of the stages of socialism:
China presently is in the primary stage, but is at this point well along to the next stage, the intermediate. These aren’t hard lines or jumps, but gradually worked through and towards.
Cope
And that socialist country can be developing and also bad.
A socialist country can be bad, but if this is what you consider bad the sign me up to live in a “bad” country.
90% of families in the country own their home giving China one of the highest home ownership rates in the world. What’s more is that 80% of these homes are owned outright, without mortgages or any other leans. https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/03/30/how-people-in-china-afford-their-outrageously-expensive-homes
Student debt in China is virtually non-existent. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jlim/2016/08/29/why-china-doesnt-have-a-student-debt-problem/
Chinese household savings hit another record high in 2024 https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-jones-bank-earnings-01-12-2024/card/chinese-household-savings-hit-another-record-high-xqyky00IsIe357rtJb4j
People in China enjoy high levels of social mobility https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/18/world/asia/china-social-mobility.html
The typical Chinese adult is now richer than the typical European adult https://www.businessinsider.com/typical-chinese-adult-now-richer-than-europeans-wealth-report-finds-2022-9
Real wage (i.e. the wage adjusted for the prices you pay) has gone up 4x in the past 25 years, more than any other country. This is staggering considering it’s the most populous country on the planet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw8SvK0E5dI
The real (inflation-adjusted) incomes of the poorest half of the Chinese population increased by more than four hundred percent from 1978 to 2015, while real incomes of the poorest half of the US population actually declined during the same time period. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w23119/w23119.pdf
From 1978 to 2000, the number of people in China living on under $1/day fell by 300 million, reversing a global trend of rising poverty that had lasted half a century (i.e. if China were excluded, the world’s total poverty population would have risen) https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/China’s-Economic-Growth-and-Poverty-Reduction-Angang-Linlin/c883fc7496aa1b920b05dc2546b880f54b9c77a4
From 2010 to 2019 (the most recent period for which uninterrupted data is available), the income of the poorest 20% in China increased even as a share of total income. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.DST.FRST.20?end=2019&%3Blocations=CN&%3Bstart=2008
By the end of 2020, extreme poverty, defined as living on under a threshold of around $2 per day, had been eliminated in China. According to the World Bank, the Chinese government had spent $700 billion on poverty alleviation since 2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/31/world/asia/china-poverty-xi-jinping.html
Over the past 40 years, the number of people in China with incomes below $1.90 per day – the International Poverty Line as defined by the World Bank to track global extreme poverty– has fallen by close to 800 million. With this, China has contributed close to three-quarters of the global reduction in the number of people living in extreme poverty. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2022/04/01/lifting-800-million-people-out-of-poverty-new-report-looks-at-lessons-from-china-s-experience
Was it you who recently posted an article that China now has a minimum wage that exceeds US minimum wage at $8/hr? I believe so, but it may have been in geopolitics somewhere.
Oh don’t think it was me, but that’s pretty incredible to see.
I have neighbors who would appreciate that wage.
Sure, but do the Uyghurs get to enjoy all this?
Yes, Xinjiang is one of the regions getting more focused development right now. The best and most comprehensive resource I have seen so far is Qiao Collective’s Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation. Qiao Collective is explicitly pro-PRC, but this is an extremely comprehensive write-up of the entire background of the events, the timeline of reports, and real and fake claims.
I also recommend reading the UN report and China’s response to it. These are the most relevant accusations and responses without delving into straight up fantasy like Adrian Zenz, professional propagandist for the Victims of Communism Foundation, does.
Tourists go to Xinjiang all the time, as well. You can watch videos like this one on YouTube, though it obviously isn’t going to be a comprehensive view of a complex situation like this.
Removed by mod
Do you just accuse everyone of being a bot if they reply with sources to an often-seen quip?
I’d love to hear one thing you think China is doing that is bad that the US is not also doing to a larger degree. Please enlighten me.
This happens every time. When you actually ask what the “bad” part is, they just deflect.
Both are bad.
Ah nothing of substance to add got it
.ml ain’t worth the effort.
You’ve given none to begin with.
You’ve got nothing and you know it
In theory yes, but in reality, no, not even close.
Removed by mod
Already has been. Two excerpts from Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth:
Drepung monastery was one of the biggest landowners in the world, with its 185 manors, 25,000 serfs, 300 great pastures, and 16,000 herdsmen. The wealth of the monasteries rested in the hands of small numbers of high-ranking lamas. Most ordinary monks lived modestly and had no direct access to great wealth. The Dalai Lama himself “lived richly in the 1000-room, 14-story Potala Palace.” [12]
Secular leaders also did well. A notable example was the commander-in-chief of the Tibetan army, a member of the Dalai Lama’s lay Cabinet, who owned 4,000 square kilometers of land and 3,500 serfs. [13] Old Tibet has been misrepresented by some Western admirers as “a nation that required no police force because its people voluntarily observed the laws of karma.” [14] In fact it had a professional army, albeit a small one, that served mainly as a gendarmerie for the landlords to keep order, protect their property, and hunt down runaway serfs.
Young Tibetan boys were regularly taken from their peasant families and brought into the monasteries to be trained as monks. Once there, they were bonded for life. Tashì-Tsering, a monk, reports that it was common for peasant children to be sexually mistreated in the monasteries. He himself was a victim of repeatedremoved, beginning at age nine. [15] The monastic estates also conscripted children for lifelong servitude as domestics, dance performers, and soldiers.
In old Tibet there were small numbers of farmers who subsisted as a kind of free peasantry, and perhaps an additional 10,000 people who composed the “middle-class” families of merchants, shopkeepers, and small traders. Thousands of others were beggars. There also were slaves, usually domestic servants, who owned nothing. Their offspring were born into slavery. [16] The majority of the rural population were serfs. Treated little better than slaves, the serfs went without schooling or medical care. They were under a lifetime bond to work the lord’s land — or the monastery’s land — without pay, to repair the lord’s houses, transport his crops, and collect his firewood. They were also expected to provide carrying animals and transportation on demand. [17] Their masters told them what crops to grow and what animals to raise. They could not get married without the consent of their lord or lama. And they might easily be separated from their families should their owners lease them out to work in a distant location. [18]
As in a free labor system and unlike slavery, the overlords had no responsibility for the serf’s maintenance and no direct interest in his or her survival as an expensive piece of property. The serfs had to support themselves. Yet as in a slave system, they were bound to their masters, guaranteeing a fixed and permanent workforce that could neither organize nor strike nor freely depart as might laborers in a market context. The overlords had the best of both worlds.
One 22-year old woman, herself a runaway serf, reports: “Pretty serf girls were usually taken by the owner as house servants and used as he wished”; they “were just slaves without rights.” [19] Serfs needed permission to go anywhere. Landowners had legal authority to capture those who tried to flee. One 24-year old runaway welcomed the Chinese intervention as a “liberation.” He testified that under serfdom he was subjected to incessant toil, hunger, and cold. After his third failed escape, he was merciless beaten by the landlord’s men until blood poured from his nose and mouth. They then poured alcohol and caustic soda on his wounds to increase the pain, he claimed. [20]
The serfs were taxed upon getting married, taxed for the birth of each child and for every death in the family. They were taxed for planting a tree in their yard and for keeping animals. They were taxed for religious festivals and for public dancing and drumming, for being sent to prison and upon being released. Those who could not find work were taxed for being unemployed, and if they traveled to another village in search of work, they paid a passage tax. When people could not pay, the monasteries lent them money at 20 to 50 percent interest. Some debts were handed down from father to son to grandson. Debtors who could not meet their obligations risked being cast into slavery. [21]
The theocracy’s religious teachings buttressed its class order. The poor and afflicted were taught that they had brought their troubles upon themselves because of their wicked ways in previous lives. Hence they had to accept the misery of their present existence as a karmic atonement and in anticipation that their lot would improve in their next lifetime. The rich and powerful treated their good fortune as a reward for, and tangible evidence of, virtue in past and present lives.
Selection two, shorter: (CW sexual violence and mutilation)
The Tibetan serfs were something more than superstitious victims, blind to their own oppression. As we have seen, some ran away; others openly resisted, sometimes suffering dire consequences. In feudal Tibet, torture and mutilation — including eye gouging, the pulling out of tongues, hamstringing, and amputation — were favored punishments inflicted upon thieves, and runaway or resistant serfs. [22]
Journeying through Tibet in the 1960s, Stuart and Roma Gelder interviewed a former serf, Tsereh Wang Tuei, who had stolen two sheep belonging to a monastery. For this he had both his eyes gouged out and his hand mutilated beyond use. He explains that he no longer is a Buddhist: “When a holy lama told them to blind me I thought there was no good in religion.” [23] Since it was against Buddhist teachings to take human life, some offenders were severely lashed and then “left to God” in the freezing night to die. “The parallels between Tibet and medieval Europe are striking,” concludes Tom Grunfeld in his book on Tibet. [24]
In 1959, Anna Louise Strong visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, gouging out eyes, breaking off hands, and hamstringing legs. There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disemboweling. The exhibition presented photographs and testimonies of victims who had been blinded or crippled or suffered amputations for thievery. There was the shepherd whose master owed him a reimbursement in yuan and wheat but refused to pay. So he took one of the master’s cows; for this he had his hands severed. Another herdsman, who opposed having his wife taken from him by his lord, had his hands broken off. There were pictures of Communist activists with noses and upper lips cut off, and a woman who wasremovedd and then had her nose sliced away. [25]
Earlier visitors to Tibet commented on the theocratic despotism. In 1895, an Englishman, Dr. A. L. Waddell, wrote that the populace was under the “intolerable tyranny of monks” and the devil superstitions they had fashioned to terrorize the people. In 1904 Perceval Landon described the Dalai Lama’s rule as “an engine of oppression.” At about that time, another English traveler, Captain W. F. T. O’Connor, observed that “the great landowners and the priests… exercise each in their own dominion a despotic power from which there is no appeal,” while the people are “oppressed by the most monstrous growth of monasticism and priest-craft.” Tibetan rulers “invented degrading legends and stimulated a spirit of superstition” among the common people. In 1937, another visitor, Spencer Chapman, wrote, “The Lamaist monk does not spend his time in ministering to the people or educating them. […] The beggar beside the road is nothing to the monk. Knowledge is the jealously guarded prerogative of the monasteries and is used to increase their influence and wealth.” [26] As much as we might wish otherwise, feudal theocratic Tibet was a far cry from the romanticized Shangri-La so enthusiastically nurtured by Buddhism’s western proselytes.
-Dr. Michael Parenti
@Cowbee @Semi_Hemi_Demigod
@tldrbot please help 😭Old Tibet was a brutal feudal society based on widespread slavery and torture. Read the actual excerpts, or better yet the article itself, for examples and evidence.
I’m not reading all that.
worlder try not to admit ignorance challenge (impossible)
That’s why you’re confidently incorrect.
Yep, instead you parrot right-wing talking points defending a brutal slave-driven feudal society run on torture. It’s easy to tune-out anything that disproves your worldview, it’s difficult to confront your own biases.
Chickenshit response
Then parse it through ai to see if it disproves your stance smooth brained idiot
Tell me you have no idea of the history of Tibet without telling me
Get a job
And what are we doing not learning the good parts?
Reminder its always a competition between who sucks the least. Another reminder that all the worlds most powerful nations are all spearheading censorships of one kind or another. The future doesnt look luxury or gay anymore. It looks redacted
What a stupid world
they can, but they ain’t.
🤣
