Piefed is baking these tools into the code itself, Lemmy doesn’t. Communists aren’t opposed to censorship unilaterally, disinformation can and should be removed (along with bigotry, etc.). However, Rimu is waging a crusade against Lemmy’s left-wing userbase and is trying to consolidate a viewpoint that aligns with, well, Rimu, in the code itself.
Yep lol, totally not suspicious at all.
Yep, that comment from Rimu to goat is in that community itself actually. And agreed, Rimu is killing Piefed.
Rimu made it pretty clear:
Piefed is a political answer to the fact that communists have a strong foothold on Lemmy and the devs are communists. In accusing the communists of being “authoritarian,” though, Rimu implements social credit scores, blocks left wing news sources and calls them “right wing,” all manner of disinformation and manipulation to protect liberalism. Meanwhile, Rimu keeps good company in the Nazi bar.
Yep, the US Empire and it’s vassal states all use authority for the imperialists.
Lemmy is filled with communists, not “Chinese agents.” Why the dishonest, Orientalist framing?
Regarding 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 a group of Chinese diaspora living in the west, and they compiled an extremely comprehensive write-up of the entire background of the events, the timeline of reports, and real and fake claims. The majority of their sourcing is western, and they cite official Chinese government writing and white papers when relevant. Uyghur culture is preserved.
I also recommend reading the UN report as well as (especially) China’s response to it, which eclipses it in size and detail.These are the most relevant accusations and responses without delving into straight up fantasy like Adrian Zenz, Christian nationalist and professional propagandist for the Victims of Communism Foundation, does. Zenz’ work has been thoroughly discredited, yet is supported by western media for its utility in fearmongering. An example is lying about 8.7% of new IUDs as 80%, to back up claims of “forced sterilization,” from this chart:
Globally, Iran and Russia both play a progressive role in undermining the era of imperialism, while the US Empire and Israel play a reactionary role in perpetuating and benefiting from the era of imperialism. That can be a tough pill to swallow if you’ve never really looked into imperialism as a special stage in capitalism, but with that understanding any generic demonization levied against flawed states that ultimately play a progressive global role only serves to benefit the reactionary states.
I hear you, there’s definitely merit in simplifying or trying to refresh older works if done well, the problem is how demonized Marxism is in the west and the fact that a lot of older works are still valid today. I like Red Sails because it combines the new with the old in an approachable way. Many older works are still valid, and being primary works means it’s less likely to be misinterpreted.
There’s also the importance of studying history, and the process of how ideas came to be. This part is especially critical, Marx, Lenin, etc. aren’t brilliant because they were born that way and had great ideas beamed into their heads from nothing. They existed within definite circumstances, and this shaped the development of Marxism-Leninism. Returning to the classics, and drawing a steady line of development to today, is the only way to get a great idea of what’s going on.
For example, if you see a snapshot of something, it’s very hard to tell what will happen next without also knowing what led up to it. Take any screenshot from a random movie, and it’s unlikely you can predict the next scene. Now watch the movie from the beginning, and you can usually predict the next few seconds, maybe even major plot points. You’ll also likely be wrong on some theories, or need to adjust them. That’s a microcosm of the Marxist method!
I understand, but once you cool down I think it’s worth revisiting, if not with anyone here, on your own.
Maybe hold off on using terminology like “degenerate,” it has fascist implications. I agree with the sentiment, but we should be careful with wording.
Tankie means something specific, a sympathizer for communist or aesthetically communist states which lack either free and fair elections, a freedom to criticize the government, or just general human rights.
I’d like to offer a correction:
Tankie means something specific, a sympathizer for socialist states which are alleged by liberals to lack either free and fair elections, a freedom to criticize the government, or just general human rights.
I fully agree that the definition you gave is the one that wielders of the pejorative believe to be true, but I’d argue my definition is more accurate as it accounts for the fact that “tankies” do not believe the allegations against socialist states to be true or to be highly exaggerated and removed from historical context in liberal narratives.
Whenever a socialist is accused of being a “tankie,” they generally have 1 of 3 choices:
Attack the validity of the pejorative as a real ideology
Accept the pejorative, and use this to move onto discussing specifics, forcing the accuser’s hand
Accept that “tankies” can and do exist, but try to convince your interlocutor that you aren’t one of them.
The third is the most common among western leftists, and also happens to be the most self-defeating. Only options 1 and 2 actually present a path forward for socialists. You can replace “tankie” above with “woke” and the argument still applies, you can either own the label or attack the validity of the label to move forward.
You don’t have to respond, but I do want to echo QinShiHuangsSchlong’s point: many hierarchies exist due to necessity or sheer practicality in a way that far supercedes any problems arising from being a hierarchy. For example, horizontally organizing a nuclear power plant is a recipe for disaster, and managing and coordinating the production and logistics chain of sufficiently complex but useful technology like smartphones requires vertical elements to administration.
The fact of this then brings us to the Marxist critique, that hierarchy isn’t the problem inherently, but class and the products of class society.
QinShiHuangsSchlong beat me to the punch, there are countless modern Marxists and Marxists since Lenin that have continued to apply the Marxist method to new eras and new conditions. Marxism-Leninism is referred to as an immortal science because it’s based on an ever-adapting framework for understanding the world, dialectical materialism, which in all this time have proven adaptable and fundamentally correct. We may teach Marxism in a new way with new conditions as we discover new eras, but the baseline is still applicable and necessary.
I won’t retread what QinShiHuangsSchlong already said very well, I want to expand by saying I don’t find it compelling at all when someone uses the “read theory” argument. Essentially, it says “I can’t argue with you well, so I recommend you look into those who can.” Demeaning someone and then giving them homework is a horrible way to get them to do so!
One of the best ways to comprehend theory is to try to simplify it for others, and be capable of clearly expressing your points without relying on “quote-mining” or “phrasemongering.”
This isn’t an argument against theory, but in favor of more effective discussion, as I was once extremely guilty of dumping recommendations for Marxist theory without properly explaining it, causing the argument to slide off like water on a windowpane. It also assumes a lack of competence on the other party’s part, which can quickly backfire if it indeed turns out that they know what they are talking about (such as QinShiHuangsSchlong here).
“Defending” genocide? Absolutely not. Genocide is the one of the greatest of all crimes against humanity, so when accusations of genocide are falsely levied they should then be resolutely denounced, lest they undermine real genocide, such as what Palestinians face at the hands of the Zionist entity. I have no shame for dispelling atrocity propaganda that undermines existing struggles, same as I would for the supposed “white genocide” in South Africa.
Just as “white genocide” was atrocity propaganda against those fighting apartheid, so too is the Xinjiang genocide narrative a political creation, with definite goals. Xinjiang is a key region in the Belt and Road Initiative, bridging the East to the West. Xinjiang is a key artery in the new multipolar era, and the West was hoping to foment radicalized elements to sever the artery and bleed the project dry.
When the CPC responded not with guns and tanks but with education centers and job opportunities, the West switched tactics to alleging “genocide,” spearheaded by a lone christofascist paid propagandist named Adrian Zenz.
Today, the de-radicalization program has worked. Violent attacks are near 0, and Uyghur culture and identity are preserved and celebrated. I recommend reading Xinjiang: A Report and Resource Compilation if you wish to learn what’s actuallu going on in Xinjiang and how it developed historically.
China is “authoritarian” from the perspective of capitalists, but liberating for the working classes. China is not committing genocide. Chinese citizens can and do critique the government, what’s often censored is reactionary views or capitalists trying to foment liberalization. The markets are not free, and that’s a good thing, as it’s key to the success of China’s Socialist Market Economy.
As you should, it’s very in-depth and deserves it.
Personally, I prefer Xinjiang: A Report and Resource Compilation. It’s better than that memoir by a Statesian politician, and uses a combination of western reporting and hard empirical data.
The CPC is a communist party working in the interests of the working classes, so I think that’s a good thing.