You must log in or register to comment.
Is that a real photo in the bottom? Fucking incredible if it is.
Waiting for Liberals to actually have a thought out response to the excellent resources the MLs of this community provide.
*Run
China is still the world’s leading polluter, in a time where those so-called “scientists” most definitely know what they’re doing contributing to global climate change like they are. No country is innocent, but making no attempt to not be first isn’t a defensible policy position.
China is the world’s biggest emitter of carbon gases**
Yeah, because it’s the second-largest population in the world and it’s producing & exporting the world’s products. You don’t get to de-industrialize, import your products, and then chastise your producers for using more energy than you, when they’re using that energy for you.
China is also the largest green energy user and producer of green energy technology, which it also exports.
The Economist: China’s clean-energy revolution will reshape markets and politics
ROFL. Stow the faux benevolence. It’s nonsense. Nobody is acting out of the goodness of their hearts in a capitalist transaction. They’re choosing to pollute instead of choosing to do other things. That’s not for anyone’s benefit but their own. The long-term consequences are so well-understood that only the extremely selfish are optimizing for the short-term.
China’s choice to build a national highway system instead of a national railway system wasn’t done with ecological concerns as the priority. They’re, again, choosing to pollute more purely because of the short-run benefit instead of doing something else that optimizes for humanity’s collective benefit.
So weird how the supposedly collectivist country isn’t acting in all of our best interest. Communism is an idea so good that they’ll silence you forever if you disagree.
I’m so tired
Dictatorship might seem appealing while democracy is failing, but we should never give up on democracy in exchange for safety and stability.
You have it the wrong way around: Chinese democracy is appealing while western capitalist dictatorship is failing.
You can’t give up what you never had. Previously.
It’s not wrong to say regulatory capture is a problem, it just doesn’t go far enough. The US government was never not captured by the bourgeoisie, because the US was born of a bourgeois revolution[1]. The wealthy, white, male, land-owning, largely slave-owning Founding Fathers constructed a bourgeois state with “checks and balances” against the “tyranny of the majority”. It was never meant to represent the majority—the working class—and it never has, despite eventually allowing women and non-whites (at least those not disenfranchised by the carceral system) to vote. BBC: [Princeton & Northwestern] Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy
The game is rigged. The election cycle’s pomp and circumstance is to divert your energy and attention from the fact that it’s a big club, and you ain’t in it.
the US is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and that people still fail to see that after the epstein files is actually shocking
china, on the other hand, is one of the most functional democracies in the world
China has democracy. Just not bourgeois liberal democracy. The Chinese political system is based on whole-process people’s democracy, a form of consultative democracy. The local levels are directly elected, and then these representatives from around the country elect people to higher rungs, meaning any candidate at the top level must have worked their way up from the bottom and directly proved themselves. Also due to the nature of things the vast majority of representatives are among those directly elected by the people. You should research things before you just say things. And we’re very happy with our system. Even Harvard puts the approval rating around 95%.
Polls in authoritarian countries are notoriously more positive about own countries than in democratic ones due to insane amount of propaganda (yes, even compared to US). In which next country do we di polls next - Russia or North Korea?
“During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.”
Blackshirts and Reds, Michael Parenti
China is democratic, though. In addition to QinShiHuangsSchlong’s comment, I recommend Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance. Socialist democracy has been imperfect, but has gone through a number of changes and adaptations over the years as we’ve learned more from testing theory to practice. Boer goes over the history behind socialist democracy in this textbook.
They’re both bad…
Thank you, please continue investing into the American stock market. I genuinely appreciate what you’re doing for me. I will think of you liberals every day as I reap the rewards from taking advantage of your actions in retirement.
Ooooh, you forgot to say ‘Um, Actually…’ so we cannot award you the point. Any other toddlers posing as anarchists can buzz in now to steal.
I think it’s more likely they’re just a USian, they deliberately elect these kinds of governments over and over.
I mean maybe it’s just an American values thing but I actually don’t think scientists are as bad as Epstein associates.
Both states are awful.
Wow, that was hard.
The United States of America just assisted in carrying out a genocide.
China has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty through progressive economic policies.
Please tell me, specifically, why “both states are awful.”
What is your example of a ‘good’ one?
A lot of people are so blackpilled by capitalist realism that they think “all sides bad” is the enlightened position of Serious People. It also conveniently means that There Is No Alternative, and there’s no point in trying to assert change.
Being wrong takes no effort.
Hell yeah! All states are awful, bed time is authoritarian, and green vegetables are fascist.
Ohh, so I get to pick which awful country is better? Cool choices.
Why do you think China is awful?
Fire ass name btw
Thank you Comrade Sharkfucker 🫡
My Chinese friends living in New Zealand as dusk citizens are afraid to criticize the Chinese government even in private online conversations. That says a lot, I think.
How do you justify all the censorship and working 996 for an example?
No one will deny that China has censorship. We do as well, but it’s more subtle, covert, informal, and sophisticated, which Michael Parenti and Noam Chomsky have explained in great detail. China’s censorship is largely out in the open. It’s made clear where the lines are. The press freedom in bourgeois democracies, A.K.A. social democracies, is the freedom of the media owned by the capitalist class and by the government, a government which is run by the capitalist class.
“996” was never legal nor pervasive, and the state cracked down on it years ago. Western media will always make a mountain out of a molehill to maximally smear China, because the Cold War never ended.
While I don’t posit that China is uniquely awful here are some low lights:
- The oppression of the Uyghur Muslims
- The invasion of Tibet
- The threatened annexation of Taiwan
- The Tiananmen Square massacre. Shall I go on?
deleted by creator
- Oppression of Uyghur ISIS terrorist members.
- Liberation of British-colonized Tibet, run by a local theocrat that enslaved most of its people and by enslaved I mean they had officially been designated as serfs to the state, as human property of the clergy, by law.
- You can’t annex your own country, but what you can do is support an expelled far-right party of a country that kills the indigenous people of an island and pretend that these murderers are somehow the victims.
- The Tiananmen square insurgency was a CIA-backed coup attempt where the insurgents murdered 100+ Chinese army choir soldiers that were on their way to the square to sing out the protesters off the square.
Go on…
