The way I see it talked about, that seems to be how a lot of people think. Every time a flaw about China is brought up there will always be someone with paragraphs upon paragraphs of denials. No matter how big or small the flaw.
Which reeks of people paid to post biased propaganda, and if they’re not being paid that’s just pathetic for defending a government as vehemently as they do.
I also have not once seen a person simping for China accept a specific criticism.
Have you considered a lot of your criticism are not accepted or have paragraphs of denials analysis because a lot of your criticism stem from a faulty base understanding and/or analysis (such as overstating the scale/scope of the issue if it exists or hammering on criticisms that aren’t real like the “genocide”)?
Just an example of what I’m talking about:
The hukou system in the modern day is deeply flawed and there are many criticisms to be made of it such as it leading to wage disparity etc. However if I were to then say that the hukou system never made any sense, was senseless cruelty or some other such nonsense jumped off from it that would necessitate a few paragraphs of explanation and rebuttal to reach the truth of the matter. Which is that the system in the modern day is outdated and harmful but was a necessary policy to avoid massive slums forming and despite it’s harms does have some positive aspects such as the guaranteed land and homesteading rights should one end up homeless.
It’s important that criticism be principled and precise for it to have any meaning. I’d be very interested to hear some of your criticisms that were faced with paragraphs of “denials”.
The issue is that the “criticisms” that people bring up aren’t reality, they’re propaganda. We can talk about real issues just fine, if/when you spend the time first learning how China really is, then we can actually have a productive discussion and treat you seriously. As it is we’re not gonna act as if disproven shit is real.
Give me some actual flaws then. No government is without flaw, so prove that you can actually speak negatively about China.
You also have fail to address the fact that many people will spend so much time and effort on arguing in Chinas favour. Everyone and their dog just seem to be waiting for the chance to write their dissertation on the benevolence of China, and yet rarely do I see the same in defence of western countries. Does that not reek of an intentional propaganda campaign to you? Not that you’ll ever admit that.
Everyone and their dog just seem to be waiting for the chance to write their dissertation on the benevolence of China, and yet rarely do I see the same in defence of western countries.
Have you considered that what looks like “dissertations” might just be people applying materialist analysis, seeking truth from facts against the propaganda wave?
That China, flaws and contradictions included, has still secured historical wins for the proletariat of the periphery (especially in China), while the Western imperial bloc runs and has been running the world’s largest and most advanced exploitation and immiseration machine in human history on throughout the periphery?
So of course dissecting China takes nuance to weigh the real gains against the flaws and discern the truth from the wave of lies?
When you do a material analysis of the West and what’s left to weigh? Just capitalist plunder, imperialist immiseration, and fascism.
Wow, you’ve replied to another one of my comments in this thread after an hour, with zero prompting. You must be coming back here again and again just to pick fights.
This is the point I’m making, people aren’t this passionate about defending a government and pushing propaganda unless they’re paid to do so.
Sort feed by new comments. See comment. Reply. That is how forums work. An hour is not a stakeout.
Your real argument at its core is that no Chinese(or otherwise) person could genuinely support the Chinese government unless they are paid or brainwashed. That is chauvinism. You dismiss my lived experience, my family’s gains, and the material progress hundreds of millions have seen because it does not fit your Western notions of “how it should be”.
It is the same logic as the person earlier today in this very thread who told me mainlanders only support the government because we “do not know any better.” Different person, same paternalism. Any Chinese(or otherwise) person who offers a nuanced, factual critique that weighs both gains and flaws must be compromised. Any mass consensus in China must be manufactured. The only valid analysis, in your view, is the one that confirms Western superiority.
I am not paid. I am not brainwashed. I am someone who applies materialist analysis and sees what China has actually delivered for its people. If that threatens your worldview, that is your problem. Not mine.
Do you think, perhaps, that there could be a middle ground between “as awful as the US Empire” and “absolutely perfect and must not have any problems spoken about?” Do you think the position “US Empire is awful, China is good but not perfect” can exist, or is that too nuanced?
Lol. Sorry, one is absolutely perfect and must not have any problems spoken about. Let’s do some more you vs us bullshit (not that I am from either).
Nobody said that and you know it, you’re full of shit
Lol you’re doing the angry 12 year old thing of throwing up your hands and going “Oh so China must be an absolute perfect heaven on earth, huh?!”
The way I see it talked about, that seems to be how a lot of people think. Every time a flaw about China is brought up there will always be someone with paragraphs upon paragraphs of denials. No matter how big or small the flaw.
Which reeks of people paid to post biased propaganda, and if they’re not being paid that’s just pathetic for defending a government as vehemently as they do.
I also have not once seen a person simping for China accept a specific criticism.
Have you considered a lot of your criticism are not accepted or have paragraphs of
denialsanalysis because a lot of your criticism stem from a faulty base understanding and/or analysis (such as overstating the scale/scope of the issue if it exists or hammering on criticisms that aren’t real like the “genocide”)?Just an example of what I’m talking about: The hukou system in the modern day is deeply flawed and there are many criticisms to be made of it such as it leading to wage disparity etc. However if I were to then say that the hukou system never made any sense, was senseless cruelty or some other such nonsense jumped off from it that would necessitate a few paragraphs of explanation and rebuttal to reach the truth of the matter. Which is that the system in the modern day is outdated and harmful but was a necessary policy to avoid massive slums forming and despite it’s harms does have some positive aspects such as the guaranteed land and homesteading rights should one end up homeless.
It’s important that criticism be principled and precise for it to have any meaning. I’d be very interested to hear some of your criticisms that were faced with paragraphs of “denials”.
The issue is that the “criticisms” that people bring up aren’t reality, they’re propaganda. We can talk about real issues just fine, if/when you spend the time first learning how China really is, then we can actually have a productive discussion and treat you seriously. As it is we’re not gonna act as if disproven shit is real.
Give me some actual flaws then. No government is without flaw, so prove that you can actually speak negatively about China.
You also have fail to address the fact that many people will spend so much time and effort on arguing in Chinas favour. Everyone and their dog just seem to be waiting for the chance to write their dissertation on the benevolence of China, and yet rarely do I see the same in defence of western countries. Does that not reek of an intentional propaganda campaign to you? Not that you’ll ever admit that.
Have you considered that what looks like “dissertations” might just be people applying materialist analysis, seeking truth from facts against the propaganda wave?
That China, flaws and contradictions included, has still secured historical wins for the proletariat of the periphery (especially in China), while the Western imperial bloc runs and has been running the world’s largest and most advanced exploitation and immiseration machine in human history on throughout the periphery?
So of course dissecting China takes nuance to weigh the real gains against the flaws and discern the truth from the wave of lies?
When you do a material analysis of the West and what’s left to weigh? Just capitalist plunder, imperialist immiseration, and fascism.
Wow, you’ve replied to another one of my comments in this thread after an hour, with zero prompting. You must be coming back here again and again just to pick fights.
This is the point I’m making, people aren’t this passionate about defending a government and pushing propaganda unless they’re paid to do so.
And if you’re not being paid… yikes.
Sort feed by new comments. See comment. Reply. That is how forums work. An hour is not a stakeout.
Your real argument at its core is that no Chinese(or otherwise) person could genuinely support the Chinese government unless they are paid or brainwashed. That is chauvinism. You dismiss my lived experience, my family’s gains, and the material progress hundreds of millions have seen because it does not fit your Western notions of “how it should be”.
It is the same logic as the person earlier today in this very thread who told me mainlanders only support the government because we “do not know any better.” Different person, same paternalism. Any Chinese(or otherwise) person who offers a nuanced, factual critique that weighs both gains and flaws must be compromised. Any mass consensus in China must be manufactured. The only valid analysis, in your view, is the one that confirms Western superiority.
I am not paid. I am not brainwashed. I am someone who applies materialist analysis and sees what China has actually delivered for its people. If that threatens your worldview, that is your problem. Not mine.
Do you think, perhaps, that there could be a middle ground between “as awful as the US Empire” and “absolutely perfect and must not have any problems spoken about?” Do you think the position “US Empire is awful, China is good but not perfect” can exist, or is that too nuanced?