CHINA BAD AND USA BAD! They both fucking suck! But hey, keep defending the ‘communist’ survailence state that is one of the largest exporters in the global market. I am sure the workers feel like they own the profits.
I’ve yet to see a convincing explanation of why China would even be interested in this data… what good would it even be to them?
We know American tech, media giants, and government contractors and agencies use it for profit and domestic control but, even if you believe China is just as much of a dystopian capitalist surveillance-state as the USA, what profit is there for Chinese capitalists to extract from American data that they can’t already extract much more efficiently through American data brokers? As for the government end, is the interest in having control over Americans in American territory even comparable to that of the American government? It’s not like the vast majority of the data would even be actionable or relevant to the Chinese government.
It just doesn’t make sense for Chinese capitalists/government to be even a fraction as aggressive in surveilling Americans as their American counterparts. It seems more like a distraction to me and an excuse to avoid talking about American surveillance being every bit as bad as you imagine Chinese surveillance to be.
As for being the “largest exporters in the global market”, if the profit was all that enticing on a private scale, the US capitalist class certainly could have chosen to compete with China in that avenue. They chose to boost their short term profits by deindustrializating instead. What does that tell you?
Given that the CPC is overwhelmingly popular with the people of China in a way our own government could never imagine being here at home, i bet they do.
Yes, you can, because this is data from western orgs, trying to understand why the PRC works. From a realpolitik perspective, it is in the interests of the west to figure out why the people of China support their government, so that can give them wedges to exploit by identifying cracks. The Ash Center even mentions this directly by stating that if the CPC fails to continue providing dramatic improvements in living standards, support will likely fall.
Further, the PRC isn’t especially egregious when it comes to surveillance when compared with the west, and citizens do have freedom of speech. It’s the speech of celebrities, capitalists, and private media that is controlled, because historically capital has used media to undermine socialist states like the USSR.
Even if its western organizations, if they’re asking current citizens of the country who are residing in that country i would say their responses would still be limited by that country’s freedom of speech.
Also, how exactly do they differentiate regular citizens from those other groups you mentioned? Do they have a strict line between “citizen” and “celebrity”? Because if I was an authoritarian and someone was saying something online that I didn’t want spreading, as soon as they got any traction or platform online (so, the moment that speech starts to actually make a difference) I would label them a “celebrity” and take away their freedom of speech.
Not to mention the speech of regular citizens is absolutely controlled, with social media sites having blacklists on topics and words, for example.
I also doubt that there is any line between “private media” and “private media that is controlled,” and I will always argue that a free press is an absolute necessity for freedom of speech because control over the information citizens receive is a form of control over their thoughts.
On a final note. I wonder if the chart above contained the opinions of any Uyghurs in western China? And would the rest of the country believe so thoroughly that the rights of all were protected if media was allowed to report on what’s happening there?
You have an extremely simplistic and confused understanding of the PRC, and non-western politics in general. I’m not saying this to be mean, I mean this to be an encouragement to not simply buy the western viewpoint whole-cloth without doing your due dilligence.
There isn’t a “celebrity detector.” Put simply, if those with influence mouth off, they are usually punished, be they corrupt party members that are then purged, or wealthy capitalists like Jack Ma that wish to undermine the socialist system. State control of media is one of the demands listed right in the manifesto of the Communist Party as outlined by Marx and Engels, because if the state does not have control, then private capitalists have free reign. Non-state media is not “more free,” just under control of capitalists.
Secondly, nobody is categorically an “authoritarian.” Authority is a tool used by every state, what matters is which class the state is an extension of. In the west, that class is the capitalist class, in the PRC, it’s the proletariat.
Thirdly, the CPC is not “controlling the thoughts” of Chinese citizens. VPNs are widespread, and Chinese citizens are not stupid. They support socialism because it works to dramatically uplift their lives, they’ve lived it.
So, exactly as I thought, if someone “has influence” (read: their speech is reaching people) then their speech is limited. That sounds to me like speech is only free if it’s fairly private, and as soon as it has any influence it can be shut down, which is not in any form actually free speech, sorry.
Also, to be clear about something - I am not against socialism. I am not the kind of American who thinks that China bad because they’re communist/socialist. I am, however, a believer in democracy, a defender of free speech, and against the idea of a surveillance state regardless of whether its capitalist or socialist or whatever else.
Do you not see the blindingly obvious conflict of interest of reporting on allegations of genocide and human rights abuses from a media controlled by the state those allegations are levied against? Should I go ask the IDF what’s happening in Gaza next, and just start spreading that around as what’s “really happening?”
I’ll still give it a read because I want to be well informed but I’m not going to put much faith in that article’s ability to be truthful given its source. If you want to convince me, give me independent media.
Again, you’re deeply confused. I gave you independent media, Qiao Collective is western independent media made up of those supportive to the PRC.
Secondly, again, you are merely gesturing at the possibility of overreach while erasing that the people of China support their system and are happy with the level at which speech of capitalists is curtailed. Influencial speech is absolutely allowed, and people are more politically engaged than in the US. You have this weird misconception of a dystopian society that just doesn’t exist in reality, likely due to only consuming western media.
And I guess that’s where we’re just going to fundamentally disagree. The state should not have control over who does and doesn’t get freedom of speech. If they do, there is not truly freedom of speech.
Then you’re lacking class consciousness. Every state serves a class over another. In capitalist societies, it’s the bourgeoisie over the proletariat. In a socialist society it’s the opposite.
You can easily observe this in how basically all of western media is owned by a few companies that dictate what information gets to you.
Furthermore, not everyone deserves freedom of speech. Nazis should have 0 right to that.
In theory thats all well and good, but in practice there is no state which I would trust to decide who does and doesn’t get free speech. If the bourgeosie don’t get free speech, then the state can silence anyone they disagree with by labeling them as part of the bourgeoisie. And while I certainly wish we could just take freedom of speech from nazis - because they absolutely do not deserve it, you’re right about that - in that case the state can silence anyone by labeling them a nazi. Which kinda is happening right now because some will try to silence people who are pro-palestinian by labeling them as anti-semetic and then comparing them to nazis. You also see that with people being labeled as terrorists, or gang affiliated, for example. (Same argument applies to due process, and to a greater extent, but thats not super relevant)
I totally get that distrust because I used to think like that too.
The problem with this line of thinking is that, in my case at least, it came from a misunderstanding of how governments/states actually work due to intense propaganda, specially by right winger politicians that keep pushing this type narrative. Different types of states function differently.
All these issues you list are deeply linked with whose class controls the state, it’s not an issue with the state itself.
then the state can silence anyone they disagree with by labeling them as part of the bourgeoisie
That would be extremely hard to do. Being part of the bourgeoisie is a material condition, so unless you tick all the boxes that makes you part of it, there’s no conceivable way to simply label someone that in a socialist society just because. Furthermore, socialist societies have mechanisms of true popular democracy in place so people have a much bigger participation in politics, if such a problem would arise, people could do something about it, which goes in complete contrast to what happens in capitalist countries like the USA where, like you mentioned, you can simply be labeled an antisemite for protesting against the genocidal entity of Israel, can then be beat by the police for protesting the genocide and even sent to prison.
The thing here is that we need to look at how this is happening in real life right now. Are socialist states (Cuba, China, Laos, Vietnam, DPRK) doing that? As far as I know, no. Are capitalist ones doing that? Yes. So that in itself already suggests something is different in these states.
In fact, the reason why in the west you get labeled antisemitic for protesting against the genocide is directly linked with the bourgeoisie since it is in their interest that Israel continue existing. Biden himself admitted back in 1986 that the existence of Israel furthers US’s interests in the region. So showing solidarity with Palestine goes directly against the US’s bourgeoisie interests. That’s why you’re attacked by the state for that.
The article above is from Brazilian 35 years old marxist-leninist comrade Jones Manoel. He is a tall black man from a slum in the state of Pernambuco. The cop who killed his father worked (security guard) in Jones’ school. He had to see that cop daily. Did not tell his mom, to avoid worrying a solo mother who worked like a horse to feed her children.
Jones graduated in History, then got a MsC and is now getting a PhD.
He recently debated much older Breno Altman, a brilliant communist journalist and member of the Workers Party. Breno, a secular Jew from an influential anti-zionist family, is a major and fierce critic of Zionism. He is under fierce attack by the Zionist lobby. He has been to Israel, and an Israeli politician (a rare humane one) warned him it wouldn’t be “convenient” for him to try visiting Israel again. Breno was also convicted in Brazil (facing possible jail time) for accusing a zionist of being “coward”.
Breno is a rare Brazilian communist who still supports Lula’s government. Breno maintains the current government has an internal dispute between social-liberalism and social-developmentalism. Jones maintains the goverment is just neoliberal. Great debate!
Can we be honest and acknowledge the fact that if you’re doing socialism or communism correctly, your exports are going to be severely lower than capitalist shitholes like China and the USA? A system that values the workers is not going to have as much force behind it economically as a system that just uses as many laborers as possible as wage slaves. So China having a large export implies that they are not actually doing communism in any real way. Any claims that china is actually communist and it supports it’s peoples wellbeing is literally an American left wing conspiracy theory.
Can you be honest and acknowledge the fact that you don’t seem to know what socialism or communism are? Communism is when low production? What Hearts of Iron mod convinced you of that, and how can we get you reading something real instead?
The Soviet Union starts out with few factories and a very shitty rail network in Road to 56 (I don’t play vanilla hoi4), you literally have to fix it for them. smh stupid tankies didn’t even fix their rail network (/s)
Socialism is a mode of production. It isn’t when you import more than you export, or vice-versa. In the PRC, the large firms and key industries are publicly owned, while medium and small firms have diverse forms of ownership like private, cooperative, and joint-stock. It’s in the primary stage of socialism.
The idea that the PRC isn’t socialist is a “left” wing fallacy among Statesians. In the PRC, socialist countries like Cuba and Vietnam, and among major communist orgs, the PRC’s status as a developing socialist country is not in question.
You haven’t made any arguments as to why China is capitalist, just that it exports, but in reality it is import driven economies that are the most capitalist, and that isn’t even a rule, just a generalization.
Didn’t Mao do the Cultural Revolution specifically to prevent (not that it was implemented well or that it worked) what he saw the USSR was becoming and wanted to prevent China from following in the same capitalistic footsteps?
As in do you believe the person who said
(2) The imperialist powers have forced China to sign numerous unequal treaties by which they have acquired the right to station land and sea forces and exercise consular jurisdiction in China, [17] and they have carved up the whole country into imperialist spheres of influence. [18]
(3) The imperialist powers have gained control of all the important trading ports in China by these unequal treaties and have marked off areas in many of these ports as concessions under their direct administration.[19] They have also gained control of China’s customs, foreign trade and communications (sea, land, inland water and air). Thus they have been able to dump their goods in China, turn her into a market for their industrial products, and at the same time subordinate her agriculture to their imperialist needs
would approve of the belt and road debt trap or the actual 99 year lease China used to take over the port of Colombo in Sri Lanka
?
Or is it fine to exploit other countries if the people in your country benefit?
Even then you believe they’re socialist when Deng Xiaoping says (and Xi repeats this “common prosperity” rhetoric) that
“Our policy is to let some people and some regions get rich first, in order to drive and help the backward regions, and it is an obligation for the advanced regions to help the backward regions.”
So you recognize the failure of neoliberal “trickle down” economics but refuse to accept that if the same capital accumulation happens in a “socialist” country its suddenly not a problem?
And you really think that Jack Ma and his family won’t fight tooth and nail to keep their private jets and offshore million dollar houses instead of forgoing them voluntarily for the good of the socialist project? please…
Trade is not imperialism. The PRC is not imperialist just because of the Belt and Road Initiative involves multilateral exchange. It is not a debt trap.
The large firms and key industries in China are publicly owned. Capital accumulation is a contradiction, but it is not one that has led to capitalist takeover.
Ultimately, the Cultural Revolution failed, whether you believe it correct or incorrect in analysis. What’s important is taking a scientific approach to analyzing the PRC, and not simply thinking that because they are in the primary stage of socialism that they will never advance beyond. The evidence is to the contrary.
Jack Ma and the other capitalists have no choice, they don’t control the large firms and key industries, but the secondary industries and medium firms. They will fight as they can, class struggle exists until class no longer exists, but they exist with the consent of the state alone.
So you’re saying that China didn’t extend or take advantage of western debt traps for their own economic and geopolitical goals?
So
Sri Lanka desperately needs $1.12 billion to avoid defaulting to Western bondholders
China provides that cash immediately
In exchange they get 99-year control of a $1.4 billion strategic asset
Sri Lanka still owes them the original construction debt
China now controls 70% of future port profits for a century (or two)
And look I’m not claiming that this crisis wasn’t caused by western imperialism - but calling it a “trade” or “multilateral exchange” when China very obviously took advantage of a country in crisis for almost exclusively their own benefit is disingenuous.
Do you really see no issues with such predatory lending (irrespective of it being done by the IMF or BRI)?
There’s a widespread campaign to try to paint the PRC as imperialist to drive countries back to the IMF, but fundamentally the PRC is not imperialist. It isn’t controlled by private monopoly that needs to expand outward through the export of capital, which is why it often forgives debts partially or entirely. Further, the PRC does not require austerity politics or otherwise giving up sovereignty over the recipients economy, they pay for infrastructural development.
Because the PRC is heavily involved with the development of the global south, you can find exceptions where it doesn’t seem like the PRC is much different from the west, but at a systemic level these are outliers. You don’t even need to base this on “China good,” they just fundamentally don’t have the same mechanics that force imperialism in the west, like huge private monopoly and falling rates of profit.
The article you’ve linked says they’ve forgiven less than 5% of the total amount lended so not sure I’d classify that as “frequent”
Further, the PRC does not require austerity politics or otherwise giving up sovereignty over the recipients economy, they pay for infrastructural development.
I agree this is definitely a good thing but I want to acknowledge they do also directly profit from all this development - they’re not doing it to help others for the socialist ideal but for strategic geopolitical goals
they just fundamentally don’t have the same mechanics that force imperialism in the west, like huge private monopoly and falling rates of profit.
But they still operate in the same system which is why even their renegotiated loans never fall below the 2% inflation rate.
Idk I can understand critical support of China when it comes to challenging western imperialism I just don’t agree with their approach of rejecting egalitarianism and enforcing material inequality as a means to supposedly reach communism
Though you’ll probably deny this article as valid because it harms your perception of China being a Communist state, and usually people do not like they’re conspiracy theories to be challenged by actual fact.
Additionally, besides the argument of whether it’s communist or not, it is not a good country and if that’s what communism looks like, then I actually want no part in communism. They have no ability for free speech or even protests. Say what you want about it’s economics, but that is not how humans should be forced to live.
They have no ability for free speech or even protests.
Dawg what.
Literally the reason the government ended the covid lockdowns, despite that being the correct course of action that saved shitloads of lives, is because people got tired of it and protested, and the government listened.
Meanwhile here in the states, every protest I’ve ever been part of has been stomped down by riot cops and had it’s demands ignored.
Say what you want about it’s economics, but that is not how humans should be forced to live.
I’m sure they’re all crying and cursing their doubled lifespans
That’s an opinion piece by a non-Marxist that makes the incredibly basic error of confusing the developing stage of socialism with the characteristics of the advanced stage of communism. You’re incredibly arrogant for someone who clearly has done very little reading of Marx.
I’ve written frequently on the PRC’s model of socialism, such as this summary from a few days ago, including resources for further reading. You can even shortcut to my Read Theory, Darn it! introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list, though it’s getting some revisions.
The people of China have freedom of speech, capitalists and businesses do not. The people of China do not protest often, because the system works:
I will admit, I have not read the source theory, but I engage often with communists (most of my immidiate sphere are communists) enough to get a lot of it (I am actually an Anarcho-Communist, just to note). But my problem, as always, with a lot of you people who are obsessed with trying to use China as an example of communism, is the fact that theory and practice are two very different things. Very few places if any even follow your own theory from what I have gleaned from other comrades.
It is also really easy to pressure people to give the answers you want to for those kind of questions if you are an authoritarian state. Also from the cyber security sector, most citizens of China desperately try and get their hands on vpns or use tor in order to be able to actually access the external world, which is never a good sign and does not scream “We’re free!” to me.
Also fox news is abhorant, as is all American backed official news outlets. I use lemmy, did you really think that I watch state provided news? Or was that an ad hominim because people here dislike Fox specifically?
Marxist-Leninist theory and practice are united in the PRC. As you admit, you have not read much theory, and are commiting the same error as the person you linked: a non-Marxist judging a socialist state in the primary stage by the characteristics applicable to an advanced communist society. I linked you some good starting points so you can correct these misunderstandings, but if you are going to continue to insist on being right about theory you admitted you haven’t even read, then there isn’t much room for constructive discussion.
As for the dismissal of consistent hard data on the grounds that Chinese citizens are “pressured,” this data is from western orgs surveying Chinese citizens, unaffiliated with the CPC. Western orgs have been trying to understand CPC resilliance because they wish to undermine it, and as such have been trying to best understand why the CPC is beloved. Spoiler: it’s socialism.
The Fox News bit was a tongue-in-cheek jab referencing the fact that you are repeating right-wing talking points about the PRC near-identical to mainstream media. I apologize for the jab, but I consider it fair after you opened with jabs and condescension yourself.
A bit on the “stages of socialism” I referenced, a table from Cheng Enfu:
I appreciate the apology for the jab and i as well apologize for seeming somewhat resistant and bitter. Most of my problem with china comes from how they handle the digital front and has kind of left a bad taste in my mouth for how they treat their citizens, so it’s really hard for me to imagine they’re doing socialism correctly. I will probably go and look into the sources you linked.
CHINA BAD AND USA BAD! They both fucking suck! But hey, keep defending the ‘communist’ survailence state that is one of the largest exporters in the global market. I am sure the workers feel like they own the profits.
capitalism is when exports has to be a new one on my book 😂
I’ve yet to see a convincing explanation of why China would even be interested in this data… what good would it even be to them?
We know American tech, media giants, and government contractors and agencies use it for profit and domestic control but, even if you believe China is just as much of a dystopian capitalist surveillance-state as the USA, what profit is there for Chinese capitalists to extract from American data that they can’t already extract much more efficiently through American data brokers? As for the government end, is the interest in having control over Americans in American territory even comparable to that of the American government? It’s not like the vast majority of the data would even be actionable or relevant to the Chinese government.
It just doesn’t make sense for Chinese capitalists/government to be even a fraction as aggressive in surveilling Americans as their American counterparts. It seems more like a distraction to me and an excuse to avoid talking about American surveillance being every bit as bad as you imagine Chinese surveillance to be.
As for being the “largest exporters in the global market”, if the profit was all that enticing on a private scale, the US capitalist class certainly could have chosen to compete with China in that avenue. They chose to boost their short term profits by deindustrializating instead. What does that tell you?
Given that the CPC is overwhelmingly popular with the people of China in a way our own government could never imagine being here at home, i bet they do.
A handy chart:
Even just hypothetically, can you really trust a survey like this when it comes from a country with mass censorship and no freedom of speech?
Yes, you can, because this is data from western orgs, trying to understand why the PRC works. From a realpolitik perspective, it is in the interests of the west to figure out why the people of China support their government, so that can give them wedges to exploit by identifying cracks. The Ash Center even mentions this directly by stating that if the CPC fails to continue providing dramatic improvements in living standards, support will likely fall.
Further, the PRC isn’t especially egregious when it comes to surveillance when compared with the west, and citizens do have freedom of speech. It’s the speech of celebrities, capitalists, and private media that is controlled, because historically capital has used media to undermine socialist states like the USSR.
Even if its western organizations, if they’re asking current citizens of the country who are residing in that country i would say their responses would still be limited by that country’s freedom of speech.
Also, how exactly do they differentiate regular citizens from those other groups you mentioned? Do they have a strict line between “citizen” and “celebrity”? Because if I was an authoritarian and someone was saying something online that I didn’t want spreading, as soon as they got any traction or platform online (so, the moment that speech starts to actually make a difference) I would label them a “celebrity” and take away their freedom of speech.
Not to mention the speech of regular citizens is absolutely controlled, with social media sites having blacklists on topics and words, for example.
I also doubt that there is any line between “private media” and “private media that is controlled,” and I will always argue that a free press is an absolute necessity for freedom of speech because control over the information citizens receive is a form of control over their thoughts.
On a final note. I wonder if the chart above contained the opinions of any Uyghurs in western China? And would the rest of the country believe so thoroughly that the rights of all were protected if media was allowed to report on what’s happening there?
You have an extremely simplistic and confused understanding of the PRC, and non-western politics in general. I’m not saying this to be mean, I mean this to be an encouragement to not simply buy the western viewpoint whole-cloth without doing your due dilligence.
There isn’t a “celebrity detector.” Put simply, if those with influence mouth off, they are usually punished, be they corrupt party members that are then purged, or wealthy capitalists like Jack Ma that wish to undermine the socialist system. State control of media is one of the demands listed right in the manifesto of the Communist Party as outlined by Marx and Engels, because if the state does not have control, then private capitalists have free reign. Non-state media is not “more free,” just under control of capitalists.
Secondly, nobody is categorically an “authoritarian.” Authority is a tool used by every state, what matters is which class the state is an extension of. In the west, that class is the capitalist class, in the PRC, it’s the proletariat.
Thirdly, the CPC is not “controlling the thoughts” of Chinese citizens. VPNs are widespread, and Chinese citizens are not stupid. They support socialism because it works to dramatically uplift their lives, they’ve lived it.
Fourth, Chinese citizens know what’s going on in Xinjiang. I suspect you don’t, and suggest you read through Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation.
So, exactly as I thought, if someone “has influence” (read: their speech is reaching people) then their speech is limited. That sounds to me like speech is only free if it’s fairly private, and as soon as it has any influence it can be shut down, which is not in any form actually free speech, sorry.
Also, to be clear about something - I am not against socialism. I am not the kind of American who thinks that China bad because they’re communist/socialist. I am, however, a believer in democracy, a defender of free speech, and against the idea of a surveillance state regardless of whether its capitalist or socialist or whatever else.
Do you not see the blindingly obvious conflict of interest of reporting on allegations of genocide and human rights abuses from a media controlled by the state those allegations are levied against? Should I go ask the IDF what’s happening in Gaza next, and just start spreading that around as what’s “really happening?”
I’ll still give it a read because I want to be well informed but I’m not going to put much faith in that article’s ability to be truthful given its source. If you want to convince me, give me independent media.
Again, you’re deeply confused. I gave you independent media, Qiao Collective is western independent media made up of those supportive to the PRC.
Secondly, again, you are merely gesturing at the possibility of overreach while erasing that the people of China support their system and are happy with the level at which speech of capitalists is curtailed. Influencial speech is absolutely allowed, and people are more politically engaged than in the US. You have this weird misconception of a dystopian society that just doesn’t exist in reality, likely due to only consuming western media.
Mass censorship of the bourgeois. No freedom of speech for the bourgeois.
And I guess that’s where we’re just going to fundamentally disagree. The state should not have control over who does and doesn’t get freedom of speech. If they do, there is not truly freedom of speech.
Then you’re lacking class consciousness. Every state serves a class over another. In capitalist societies, it’s the bourgeoisie over the proletariat. In a socialist society it’s the opposite.
You can easily observe this in how basically all of western media is owned by a few companies that dictate what information gets to you.
Furthermore, not everyone deserves freedom of speech. Nazis should have 0 right to that.
In theory thats all well and good, but in practice there is no state which I would trust to decide who does and doesn’t get free speech. If the bourgeosie don’t get free speech, then the state can silence anyone they disagree with by labeling them as part of the bourgeoisie. And while I certainly wish we could just take freedom of speech from nazis - because they absolutely do not deserve it, you’re right about that - in that case the state can silence anyone by labeling them a nazi. Which kinda is happening right now because some will try to silence people who are pro-palestinian by labeling them as anti-semetic and then comparing them to nazis. You also see that with people being labeled as terrorists, or gang affiliated, for example. (Same argument applies to due process, and to a greater extent, but thats not super relevant)
I totally get that distrust because I used to think like that too.
The problem with this line of thinking is that, in my case at least, it came from a misunderstanding of how governments/states actually work due to intense propaganda, specially by right winger politicians that keep pushing this type narrative. Different types of states function differently.
All these issues you list are deeply linked with whose class controls the state, it’s not an issue with the state itself.
That would be extremely hard to do. Being part of the bourgeoisie is a material condition, so unless you tick all the boxes that makes you part of it, there’s no conceivable way to simply label someone that in a socialist society just because. Furthermore, socialist societies have mechanisms of true popular democracy in place so people have a much bigger participation in politics, if such a problem would arise, people could do something about it, which goes in complete contrast to what happens in capitalist countries like the USA where, like you mentioned, you can simply be labeled an antisemite for protesting against the genocidal entity of Israel, can then be beat by the police for protesting the genocide and even sent to prison.
The thing here is that we need to look at how this is happening in real life right now. Are socialist states (Cuba, China, Laos, Vietnam, DPRK) doing that? As far as I know, no. Are capitalist ones doing that? Yes. So that in itself already suggests something is different in these states.
In fact, the reason why in the west you get labeled antisemitic for protesting against the genocide is directly linked with the bourgeoisie since it is in their interest that Israel continue existing. Biden himself admitted back in 1986 that the existence of Israel furthers US’s interests in the region. So showing solidarity with Palestine goes directly against the US’s bourgeoisie interests. That’s why you’re attacked by the state for that.
The PRC is leaps and bounds better than the US, and it isn’t close. Further, socialism isn’t when “no exports,” lol.
Socialism is when poor.
-Gang of Four
Also something about western Marxism and Christianity
Spot-on! The only socialism acceptable to the standard western viewpoint is a vow of poverty and self-sacrifice.
If China is comminist then why hasn’t it been overthrown by the CIA? Chechmate tankie
Western Marxism Loves Purity and Martyrdom, But Not Real Revolution
The article above is from Brazilian 35 years old marxist-leninist comrade Jones Manoel. He is a tall black man from a slum in the state of Pernambuco. The cop who killed his father worked (security guard) in Jones’ school. He had to see that cop daily. Did not tell his mom, to avoid worrying a solo mother who worked like a horse to feed her children.
Jones graduated in History, then got a MsC and is now getting a PhD.
https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Jones_Manoel
He recently debated much older Breno Altman, a brilliant communist journalist and member of the Workers Party. Breno, a secular Jew from an influential anti-zionist family, is a major and fierce critic of Zionism. He is under fierce attack by the Zionist lobby. He has been to Israel, and an Israeli politician (a rare humane one) warned him it wouldn’t be “convenient” for him to try visiting Israel again. Breno was also convicted in Brazil (facing possible jail time) for accusing a zionist of being “coward”.
Breno is a rare Brazilian communist who still supports Lula’s government. Breno maintains the current government has an internal dispute between social-liberalism and social-developmentalism. Jones maintains the goverment is just neoliberal. Great debate!
Governo Lula é neoliberal? Breno Altman x Jones Manoel - Debate especial https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqPhJnShKWA
If China failed US “leftists” would praise Mao every day
LMAO
What’s funny?
You.
In what way? The PRC is leaps and bounds ahead of the US from a developmental perspective and from an ethics perspective, and it isn’t close.
LMAO
Amazing, not a single point, just open admittance of not having any.
I have points, I’m just not wasting my time providing them to you.
But reading your nonsense is hilarious. Therefore: LMAO.
Can we be honest and acknowledge the fact that if you’re doing socialism or communism correctly, your exports are going to be severely lower than capitalist shitholes like China and the USA? A system that values the workers is not going to have as much force behind it economically as a system that just uses as many laborers as possible as wage slaves. So China having a large export implies that they are not actually doing communism in any real way. Any claims that china is actually communist and it supports it’s peoples wellbeing is literally an American left wing conspiracy theory.
If you’re doing communism correctly, you lift millions out of poverty while standing strong against the empire
Can you be honest and acknowledge the fact that you don’t seem to know what socialism or communism are? Communism is when low production? What Hearts of Iron mod convinced you of that, and how can we get you reading something real instead?
The Soviet Union starts out with few factories and a very shitty rail network in Road to 56 (I don’t play vanilla hoi4), you literally have to fix it for them. smh stupid tankies didn’t even fix their rail network (/s)
This is puritanism brain worms. Your position is that socialism done correctly is subsistence living. What a terrible vision.
Chinese people that like their government are part of an American left wing conspiracy I guess
You’re a clown. Talk to people that live there instead of other USians
I prefer the country that hasn’t invaded anyone in 50 years over the country that’s launched an invasion every 18 months
No, we can’t, because that’s an absurd premise.
Socialism is a mode of production. It isn’t when you import more than you export, or vice-versa. In the PRC, the large firms and key industries are publicly owned, while medium and small firms have diverse forms of ownership like private, cooperative, and joint-stock. It’s in the primary stage of socialism.
The idea that the PRC isn’t socialist is a “left” wing fallacy among Statesians. In the PRC, socialist countries like Cuba and Vietnam, and among major communist orgs, the PRC’s status as a developing socialist country is not in question.
You haven’t made any arguments as to why China is capitalist, just that it exports, but in reality it is import driven economies that are the most capitalist, and that isn’t even a rule, just a generalization.
Didn’t Mao do the Cultural Revolution specifically to prevent (not that it was implemented well or that it worked) what he saw the USSR was becoming and wanted to prevent China from following in the same capitalistic footsteps?
As in do you believe the person who said
would approve of the belt and road debt trap or the actual 99 year lease China used to take over the port of Colombo in Sri Lanka ?
Or is it fine to exploit other countries if the people in your country benefit?
Even then you believe they’re socialist when Deng Xiaoping says (and Xi repeats this “common prosperity” rhetoric) that
So you recognize the failure of neoliberal “trickle down” economics but refuse to accept that if the same capital accumulation happens in a “socialist” country its suddenly not a problem?
And you really think that Jack Ma and his family won’t fight tooth and nail to keep their private jets and offshore million dollar houses instead of forgoing them voluntarily for the good of the socialist project? please…
Trade is not imperialism. The PRC is not imperialist just because of the Belt and Road Initiative involves multilateral exchange. It is not a debt trap.
The large firms and key industries in China are publicly owned. Capital accumulation is a contradiction, but it is not one that has led to capitalist takeover.
Ultimately, the Cultural Revolution failed, whether you believe it correct or incorrect in analysis. What’s important is taking a scientific approach to analyzing the PRC, and not simply thinking that because they are in the primary stage of socialism that they will never advance beyond. The evidence is to the contrary.
Jack Ma and the other capitalists have no choice, they don’t control the large firms and key industries, but the secondary industries and medium firms. They will fight as they can, class struggle exists until class no longer exists, but they exist with the consent of the state alone.
So you’re saying that China didn’t extend or take advantage of western debt traps for their own economic and geopolitical goals?
So
And look I’m not claiming that this crisis wasn’t caused by western imperialism - but calling it a “trade” or “multilateral exchange” when China very obviously took advantage of a country in crisis for almost exclusively their own benefit is disingenuous.
Do you really see no issues with such predatory lending (irrespective of it being done by the IMF or BRI)?
There’s a widespread campaign to try to paint the PRC as imperialist to drive countries back to the IMF, but fundamentally the PRC is not imperialist. It isn’t controlled by private monopoly that needs to expand outward through the export of capital, which is why it often forgives debts partially or entirely. Further, the PRC does not require austerity politics or otherwise giving up sovereignty over the recipients economy, they pay for infrastructural development.
Because the PRC is heavily involved with the development of the global south, you can find exceptions where it doesn’t seem like the PRC is much different from the west, but at a systemic level these are outliers. You don’t even need to base this on “China good,” they just fundamentally don’t have the same mechanics that force imperialism in the west, like huge private monopoly and falling rates of profit.
The article you’ve linked says they’ve forgiven less than 5% of the total amount lended so not sure I’d classify that as “frequent”
I agree this is definitely a good thing but I want to acknowledge they do also directly profit from all this development - they’re not doing it to help others for the socialist ideal but for strategic geopolitical goals
But they still operate in the same system which is why even their renegotiated loans never fall below the 2% inflation rate.
Idk I can understand critical support of China when it comes to challenging western imperialism I just don’t agree with their approach of rejecting egalitarianism and enforcing material inequality as a means to supposedly reach communism
https://www.ie.edu/insights/articles/is-china-a-communist-country/
Though you’ll probably deny this article as valid because it harms your perception of China being a Communist state, and usually people do not like they’re conspiracy theories to be challenged by actual fact.
Additionally, besides the argument of whether it’s communist or not, it is not a good country and if that’s what communism looks like, then I actually want no part in communism. They have no ability for free speech or even protests. Say what you want about it’s economics, but that is not how humans should be forced to live.
Dawg what.
Literally the reason the government ended the covid lockdowns, despite that being the correct course of action that saved shitloads of lives, is because people got tired of it and protested, and the government listened.
Meanwhile here in the states, every protest I’ve ever been part of has been stomped down by riot cops and had it’s demands ignored.
I’m sure they’re all crying and cursing their doubled lifespans
Please Xi, my people yearn to be forced to live like that
That’s an opinion piece by a non-Marxist that makes the incredibly basic error of confusing the developing stage of socialism with the characteristics of the advanced stage of communism. You’re incredibly arrogant for someone who clearly has done very little reading of Marx.
I’ve written frequently on the PRC’s model of socialism, such as this summary from a few days ago, including resources for further reading. You can even shortcut to my Read Theory, Darn it! introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list, though it’s getting some revisions.
The people of China have freedom of speech, capitalists and businesses do not. The people of China do not protest often, because the system works:
It’s time for you to turn off Fox News.
“Theory is a leftist conspiracy!” - @basiclemmon98@lemmy.dbzer0.com probably
Those damn commies and all the books we read, lol
Sorry to challenge your little conspiracy theory based on 200 years of theory and praxis. My sources:
You should send those books to china and see if they’ll read them.
I support that.
I will admit, I have not read the source theory, but I engage often with communists (most of my immidiate sphere are communists) enough to get a lot of it (I am actually an Anarcho-Communist, just to note). But my problem, as always, with a lot of you people who are obsessed with trying to use China as an example of communism, is the fact that theory and practice are two very different things. Very few places if any even follow your own theory from what I have gleaned from other comrades.
It is also really easy to pressure people to give the answers you want to for those kind of questions if you are an authoritarian state. Also from the cyber security sector, most citizens of China desperately try and get their hands on vpns or use tor in order to be able to actually access the external world, which is never a good sign and does not scream “We’re free!” to me.
Also fox news is abhorant, as is all American backed official news outlets. I use lemmy, did you really think that I watch state provided news? Or was that an ad hominim because people here dislike Fox specifically?
Marxist-Leninist theory and practice are united in the PRC. As you admit, you have not read much theory, and are commiting the same error as the person you linked: a non-Marxist judging a socialist state in the primary stage by the characteristics applicable to an advanced communist society. I linked you some good starting points so you can correct these misunderstandings, but if you are going to continue to insist on being right about theory you admitted you haven’t even read, then there isn’t much room for constructive discussion.
As for the dismissal of consistent hard data on the grounds that Chinese citizens are “pressured,” this data is from western orgs surveying Chinese citizens, unaffiliated with the CPC. Western orgs have been trying to understand CPC resilliance because they wish to undermine it, and as such have been trying to best understand why the CPC is beloved. Spoiler: it’s socialism.
The Fox News bit was a tongue-in-cheek jab referencing the fact that you are repeating right-wing talking points about the PRC near-identical to mainstream media. I apologize for the jab, but I consider it fair after you opened with jabs and condescension yourself.
A bit on the “stages of socialism” I referenced, a table from Cheng Enfu:
I appreciate the apology for the jab and i as well apologize for seeming somewhat resistant and bitter. Most of my problem with china comes from how they handle the digital front and has kind of left a bad taste in my mouth for how they treat their citizens, so it’s really hard for me to imagine they’re doing socialism correctly. I will probably go and look into the sources you linked.
Trust me, we knew.
Socialism is when nobody does any work