• NoTagBacks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    19 days ago

    Broooo, the CCP is merely adding capitalist modes of production alongside socialist ones! The CCP only needs billionaires in the party to compete in the world as it is, bro! Bro, it’s not CCP labor exploitation if we’re letting foreign corporations do it! Actually, it’s the foreign corpos doing slave labor in Xinjiang, we’re just trying to educate them about how much they love it here, bro! Bro, it’s socialism when the government owns the means of production, because the state says it’s for the workers! Bro, how can you call it genocide when whataboutism??? Also bro, something something Russia for some reason DECADES after they stopped pretending to be communist. North Korea landed on the sun, bro.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      19 days ago

      You missed “haha if I call it ‘tinyman square’ surely I’m convincing everyone that no massacre happened there even though the CCP itself is starting to reverse course on that”

      I don’t understand why they feel the need to glaze that government so hard. They could just point out the 1985 MOVE bombing or so to relativize it out something.

      • Malyca@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 days ago

        They just want actual communism and can’t accept that it’s impossible because of human nature

        • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          18 days ago

          What are you smoking?

          • you don’t need to glaze the CCP if you want communism
          • why the hell would you assume that hUmAn nAtUrE is somehow incompatible with one of the ways humans have lived together for thousands of years?

          Read “dawn of everything”. Having a global near-monopoly of societal organization is a very new phenomenon.

  • YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    19 days ago

    Real talk! I got appropriate respect for the .ml & hexbear communities, but the lengths they jump through to appease Vlad and Xi are a little much. (Obligatory, my country’s leader isn’t great either. So I guess my point is moot.)

    • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      19 days ago

      Your point isn’t moot, multiple countries are allowed to have terrible leaders and it’s a bit silly that we’re not allowed to have an opinion on international politics if our home country isn’t a paragon of ethics (none of them are)

    • DaTingGoBrrr@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      19 days ago

      How fucking hard can it be to stand up to peoples rights and stand up against authoritarianism? Why do most of these people think that just because a dictator calls something socialist or communist it actually becomes socialist and communist? Neither Russia or China are democratic or socialist. Also not even close to communist.

      They just keep on justifying horrible leaders because they are against "the west’.

    • lumpenproletariat@quokk.auOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      19 days ago

      No, it’s not.

      The easiest way to prove this would be to go and speak to a Uyghur. Everyone I’ve ever spoken with has confirmed what is happening to their families back home.

      This is a “vocational centre”, pretty nice looking school isn’t it? Very generous of China to offer such friendly reeducation.

      • nednobbins@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 days ago

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iyFw8UF85A

        That’s Carl Sagan describing healthy skepticism.

        How do you know that image is what you claim it is?
        Do you know the location of the image?
        Do you know the photographer?
        Do you know when the image was taken?
        Do you have any evidence of what that is even an image of?

        • lumpenproletariat@quokk.auOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          19 days ago

          Perimeter fence of a vocational centre in Dabancheng, Xinjiang. Photo by Thomas Peter on September 4th, 2018.

          Tankie fuck probably thinks the Earth is flat because ‘muh healthy skepticism can’t trust evidence’.

        • Unpigged@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          19 days ago

          There isn’t enough time in universe to attempt constructive engagement with every genocide denialist out there. If you have access to all the same data and come with an angle “uyghur genocide is CIA story”, there’s nothing to engage with.

          • nednobbins@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            19 days ago

            Wikipedia is a wonderful online encyclopedia. It’s not a source and they don’t claim to be a source. It’s a starting point for people who want to learn about a topic, it’s not evidence of anything.

            If you actually go to the sources section of that link you’ll see they’re all secondary sources. For some reason, nobody can get reliable evidence on what is supposedly one of the biggest human rights violations in history.

            The excuse is always that China is so secretive and tightly managed that it’s impossible to smuggle actual evidence out of the country. The best we can do is an endless stream of anonymous and semi-anonymous sources that keep changing their story.

            • Ftumch@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              19 days ago

              Thanks for explaining how an encyclopedia works, I guess.

              Of course an encyclopedia is going to cite mostly secondary sources, especially when covering a matter that cannot be proven based on a single account or piece of evidence. That’s not some kind of gotcha.

              Personally I trust Wikipedia enough to assume they’ll cite mostly reliable secondary sources that are based on a significant amount of credible witness accounts and evidence (aka primary sources). Of course a bit of healthy skepticism is a good thing, so if you’d like to take a closer look at Wikipedia’s sources and what their claims are based on, more power to you!

              I’m curious, how many of the 403 sources cited by Wikipedia did you look at before deciding none of them are based on credible primary sources?

              • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                18 days ago

                I’m curious, how many of the 403 sources cited by Wikipedia did you look at before deciding none of them are based on credible primary sources?

                That’s the neat part. They don’t! Why bother checking things when you can dismiss reality!

        • nednobbins@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          19 days ago

          You’ll never get that.
          The “point of view” is based entirely off unverifiable claims.

          At best, you’ll get a wall of “articles” that only reference each other in a giant attribution circle. They’ll downvote you and call you a tankie all day long but they’ll never show you real evidence.

    • belated_frog_pants@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      19 days ago

      And where did you hear they were ok? Denial of genocide takes but a little propaganda and a lot of other squashing of news. It’d be a shame if china was an expert at that.