• LesserAbe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 days ago

      The original was funny to me because people thought the second guy was fine when the reality would be if a woman is calling human resources there’s probably something there. It’s a joke told from the perspective of someone who’s unable to see anything wrong and is only representing their side of the story. So I thought this was a riff on that idea, and viewed in that light this version is funny too.

    • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      69
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      Oppressing the owners of capital is good, actually. If you don’t do it you end up like the US where everyone has to pay them for everything all the time and the police is only there to prevent you from doing anything about it.

      Chinese people don’t have to go out and get jailed for doming a mass murdering CEO out of desperation, the government gladly prosecutes and makes an example of them.

      • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        75
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        9 days ago

        Except Xi Jinping is not oppressing owners of capital. China has lots of oligarchs that in some ways have a tighter grip on society than their western counterparts. He’s oppressing people that are “inconvenient” to him.

          • anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            9 days ago

            They also have more millionaires per capita than Countries like Russia, but I focused on total number because a country that actually oppressed capital owners wouldn’t have any billionaires.

            • Sop@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              China’s top 1% income share is lower than US and Russia. Top 10% income share is also lower in China.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          9 days ago
          1. Quantity of bourgeoisie is not an indication of who runs the country or which is primary, public or private property

          2. China has the second biggest population in the world, period.

          The PRC saw what happened when you cracked down too hard on wealth inequality too early in the USSR, there was significant brain drain and people took what they could elsewhere. This eventually led to decreased growth and contributed to collapse. The PRC instead allows billionaires (so long as they don’t commit crimes), and as a consequnce they now have the largest economy by PPP and second largest by GDP. It’s a “boiling the frog” approach.

          • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            And capitalists have no choice but to partake now, even western companies are tripping over themselves to set up shop in China because that’s the biggest market now that the leeches have bled the US population almost dry and destroyed their supply chains. They literally can’t compete, unless they invest and build in China.

            They’re selling them the rope, and that’s why the US has gotten progressively more rabid against the CPC.

      • balderdash@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        9 days ago

        By this logic, a monarchy that keeps the aristocracy in line is better than the US democracy. A benevolent dictator is still a dictator.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          9 days ago

          In what manner is Xi a dictator? The fact that he has been reelected democratically and hasn’t lost to someone else?

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              14
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              9 days ago

              I don’t believe you have a point. Your point rests on the PRC being a dictatorship, which it isn’t.

              • balderdash@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                9 days ago

                The Communist Party is based in the Leninist principle of “democratic centralism”. This means “debate within the party, unity in action”. It is meant to make the party more powerful by allowing dissent and debates within the party, but when it comes to taking action, all members are expected to follow the consensus even if they disagreed with it.

                Since China’s Congress is primarily members of the Communist Party, this means that the decision of the president ultimately originates in the Communist Party itself. After they reach a consensus, the whole party will vote for that consensus in the Congress. While there technically are smaller parties in China’s Congress, they act more as advisors, since it is not practically possible for them to overturn the vote, since the CPC always votes in unity.

                Formally, China’s president is elected by the Congress. But the decision of who to elect largely comes back to the CPC itself before they come to a consensus. So the final decision largely originates in the Politburo and the Central Committee.

                The president in China is harder to shift on a dime than like in the US. The president is not elected by a nation-wide vote but by the Congress itself. To change who the Congress elects, you have to change the opinions of the largest party in that Congress, you have to change the opinions of the CPC


                Xi is not technically a dictator in the same way that Putin is not technically a dictator. He is in control of a governing body that could replace him on paper, but never will. And he has dictatorial powers without real checks/balances. And, to return to my original point, it may appear that this system is fine if it produces a good result, but the power of the government should come from the will of the people.

        • SoulWager@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          The problem with a benevolent dictator is that they die eventually, and are replaced by a non-benevolent dictator, or a civil war, or both. Unfortunately it looks like the US democracy might have the same outcome.

        • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          Brother the US has ONE FIFTH of the world’s inmates (in dire conditions that provide slave labor) despite having less than 5% of the world population.

          If y’all didn’t thoughtlessly and immediately internalize whatever outlandish shit your media tells you about the yellow peril you’d be envious of their living standards and, honestly? Their political freedom too.

          That’s the point.

          • ReakDuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            8 days ago

            Cool for you that America does bad things. I really am confused about that argument because I never mentioned america and has nothing to do that china literally puts Gay people under pressure with medicine to cure them or put Islamic people into jail for being islamic and not wanting to convert. There are many stupid reaosons. But I never said America is better or smth. Thats what I interpret from your message/argument. Why do you think that the earth consists of only America? Thats the last country I wanna think of.

            • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 days ago

              Xinjiang is almost half muslim and they have like 200 mosques there, you can go visit them 🤡 there was a push for deradicalization when the CIA did as CIA does and started sponsoring terror attacks, and China, instead of responding with bombings, provided education and vocational training. The result has been zero terrorist attacks since 2019, compared to 37 attacks in 2014 alone. I mention America because that’s unequivocally the only source of this nonsense, although they launder the State Department propaganda through VoC, ASPI (the only “primary sources” ever cited, such as they are) and several other proxy organizations with funding provided by NED and the military industrial complex. The Arab League and the United Nations have sent delegations to examine the claims and found them unsustained, the Arab League congratulated China as a role model in the fight against terrorism.

              The UN delegation, by the way, was halted by America several times because they knew they wouldn’t find jack shit, and they didn’t think people would be stupid enough to keep saying it once it had been proven false.

              Real convenient that you don’t want to think of America tho, but we’re talking about an American CEO that got killed by an American and arrested by American cops for doing a desperate act of self defense.

              • ReakDuck@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 days ago

                America sucks and I like what the guy did.

                Still in such topics I didnt feel like it was related to America as China was the topic.

                Interesting how fucked up the situation is with CIA sponsoring it. In a world of Propaganda I am afraid to believe or not believe such facts. I dont even know if sources would help, as any article positive or negative could tell lies. I will partly believe this with questions and curiousity. I know how America is full of propaganda and money laundring. But this doesnt mean that other sources are not similar.

                Whatever, I like to have no opinions

          • ReakDuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            Here a lot of articles.

            https://duckduckgo.com/?q=china+jails+islamic+people&t=fpas&ia=web

            I had my source from a Video a long time ago where even Chinese Muslims were intervied about this in what they need to flee from. The topic also had Gay people needing to go through therapy because Gayness is a sickmess says china… how stupid

            But I assume its pointless to share as you see probably everything as Propaganda cuz China is glory or smth. Idk. You can explain your viewpoint if you want. It can be neutral too

            • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 days ago

              You’ve owned the tankies by posting a search link that brings up articles from US and anglophone state media sources, like CNN, BBC.

              The majority of the world disagrees with them, most notably the Muslim world, who had decades of lies from those sources defending the US bombing of their countries.

              • ReakDuck@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 days ago

                Damn, yeah. I should start to create a chart of how truthful articles are and automatically remove them from search.

                I can see how lost the articles are sometimes, following money.

  • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    9 days ago

    Working class executing CEOs that work against them

    Ruling class executing CEOs who don’t work for them

    Slight difference

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      9 days ago

      That’s an anti-Marxist view of class. What is the “ruling class” you speak of in the PRC? Government isn’t class, but an extension of the class in power, so which class is in power?

      • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        9 days ago

        It’s the latter part of “no god’s no masters”

        I’m sorry if I’ve insulted Marxist purity

          • Windex007@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            9 days ago

            My point is you had no point. You responded to a FANTASTIC explanation of the difference by splitting hairs on what by your definition qualifies as a class.

            Instead of addressing the argument, you just threw a semantics argument, which I maintain is the terminally online version of pocket sand.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              9 days ago

              I addressed it entirely. The Proletariat executing Billionaires who go against the proletariat is perfectly in line with Marx and his concept of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. The CPC has 96 million members, it isn’t a distinct class, it represents the will of the people and as such has a higher than 95% approval rate. Their implication is that the CPC is some third ruling class, and not the instrument of proletarian supremacy, which is why I corrected it.

              Your response doesn’t address any of how I analyzed their argument, by insisting I am “splitting hairs” by pointing out how the class dynamics of a bourgeois state and a proletarian state are fundamentally different, and that difference is that the proletarian state represents the real will of the people while the bourgeois state does not.

              • Windex007@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                9 days ago

                This is where I think the conversations always break down on ml.

                You fervently assert things like a 95% approval rating while selectively ignoring the “social credit” system that punishes people who don’t approve. You use large party employment to justify some kind of perfect overlap between the proletariat and the government. Where do you think the real decision making is done? Do you think it isn’t a tiny fraction of party elite? How would you view these things through the lens of manufactured consent?

                I don’t think it’s any better in a western capitalist system, but I’m not going to deceive myself into thinking that china is running fundamentally differently than any western oligarchy.

                • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 days ago

                  The “social credit system” was made to hold financial and privately-run institutions to account, and prevent companies and organizations from committing fraud and polluting the environment. Even US capitalist mouthpieces like foreign policy agree with this.

                  The government does assign universal social credit codes to companies and organizations, which they use as an ID number for registration, tax payments, and other activities, while all individuals have a national ID number. The existing social credit blacklists use these numbers, as do almost all activities in China. But these codes are not scores or rankings. Enterprises and professionals in various sectors may be graded or ranked, sometimes by industry associations, for specific regulatory purposes like restaurant sanitation. However, the social credit system does not itself produce scores, grades, or assessments of “good” or “bad” social credit. Instead, individuals or companies are blacklisted for specific, relatively serious offenses like fraud and excessive pollution that would generally be offenses anywhere. To be sure, China does regulate speech, association, and other civil rights in ways that many disagree with, and the use of the social credit system to further curtail such rights deserves monitoring.

                  These are basic things the US used to do in the 1950s, but now stopped any pretense of doing. Any regulation against business is considered “authoritarian” now.

                  Meanwhile in the US, having a bad credit score can prevent you from buying a car, house, or even renting an apartment.

                  China uses these scores to hold financial institutions to account, while the US uses scores to prevent ordinary citizens from getting housing. One country is a dictatorship of the proletariat, the other a dictatorship of capital.

                • davel@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  9 days ago

                  I’m not going to deceive myself into thinking that china is running fundamentally differently than any western oligarchy.

                  You’re choosing to continue deceiving yourself that China is not fundamentally different from any western oligarchy, got it.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 days ago

                  It’s more that liberals like yourself directly ignoring facts and statistics while blindly repeating vague and unsourced claims of “China Bad,” because it lets you remain comfortable in your pre-existing worldview. Communists do not have such luxury, which is why they seemingly always have endless sources on hand. In your comment here, as an example, you discredit the CPC’s approval with no source. However, if we ask Harvard themselves about the results of their study, they say “We find that first, since the start of the survey in 2003, Chinese citizen satisfaction with government has increased virtually across the board. From the impact of broad national policies to the conduct of local town officials, Chinese citizens rate the government as more capable and effective than ever before. Interestingly, more marginalized groups in poorer, inland regions are actually comparatively more likely to report increases in satisfaction. Second, the attitudes of Chinese citizens appear to respond (both positively and negatively) to real changes in their material well-being, which suggests that support could be undermined by the twin challenges of declining economic growth and a deteriorating natural environment.” This directly goes against your claims of “social credit” preventing this, moreover the “Orwellian Social Credit System” you hint at doesn’t even exist, at least not in the manner you imply it does.

                  You are directly decieving yourself because you license yourself to. If you actually looked at real sources and didn’t reject them reflexively, instead of accepting bourgeois media at face value, you’d sit much closer to where I do. You should read False Witnesses and Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing.” Both are excellent examples of why people don’t change their minds when seeing indisputable evidence, they willingly go along with narratives that they find more comfortable. It explains the outright anger liberals express when anticommunism is debunked. That doesn’t mean Communists don’t do the same thing, but as we live in a liberal dominated west (most likely, assuming demographics) this happens to a much lesser extent because liberalism is that which supplies these “licenses” to go along, while Communism requires hard work to begin to accept. This explains the mountains of sources Communists keep on hand, and the lack thereof from liberals who argue from happenstance and vibes.

            • comfy@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 days ago

              You responded to a FANTASTIC explanation of the difference by splitting hairs on what by your definition qualifies as a class.

              A fantastic explanation? It literally isn’t an explanation, it’s a comparison of two statements. Which is fine, and so is the critique of those statements to examine their perceived contradictions.

              From the perspective of the CPC and Marxist-Leninist theory, their ruling party represents the working class, just like our ruling parties represent the owner class of CEOs. [wikipedia page: DotP] Obviously that’s a contested claim which not even all Marxists will agree with, but it’s far from splitting hairs. It’s the basic foundation of the comparison, the implicit claim that one is a working class act and the other is not.

              • Windex007@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                9 days ago

                This is the most concise rebuttal and I think you’ve highlighted well where the root of the perceived discord lies.

                If one accepts that the CPC represents the working class, then the critique of the unfair comparison via the meme would be viewed as legitimate.

                If one contests the original assertion, then it does not. To them, Xi memeing a CEO would look to them more like Musk offing Altman.

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      9 days ago

      There is never a case of a working class party conquering political power, that hasn’t been demonized by western anti-communist society.

      When the US and its media tells you that the leaders China or Cuba or Vietnam are just “dictators”, why do you believe them?

    • within_epsilon@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      9 days ago

      Absolutely. Power is the difference. Vertical power structures all look the same. Call it communism, but those at the bottom are still ruled by those at the top. Instead give me some of that horizontal, bottom up power. No gods, no masters.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      9 days ago

      The authorization of CEO execution sounds like a good thing. People are clearly singing for it, so why not make it policy?

      • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        bc when the gubmint do thing it makes it communist and that’s literally like that book with the animals at the farm

      • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        52
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        9 days ago

        Luigi’s alleged actions were an attempt at drawing attention to social issues. Xi Jinping’s actions on the other hand are attempts at violently suppressing opposition ergo authoritarianism.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          9 days ago

          Can you provide any support for your argument that the PRC executes billionaires because of opposition, and not, say, massive corruption? Because you again seem to be making up a narrative to suit your present biases without looking at any sources.

          • recreationalcatheter@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            15
            ·
            9 days ago

            That’s a fun way of saying the government consumes you if you commit wrongthink. That’s authoritarian lol.

            • _lunar@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 days ago

              so according to your own definition, luigi killed that CEO for committing wrongthink and is authoritarian.

              like davel just showed you, they’re doing the exact same thing, but it’s only bad to you when it’s law and not adventurism. anarchists or whatever you want to call yourself really are just vibes-based and it’s so fucking annoying and reductive. you will never accomplish anything because you instinctively oppose progress as “authoritarian” when it’s actually made. you just want to feel like a rebel no matter what kind of system you’re living in.

            • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              If only Adolf Eichmann had committed his atrocities 10 years later or so, all he had to do was say “the authoritarians are canceling me for wrongthink, literally 1984” and you liberals would have ate it the fuck up

      • ebolapie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 days ago

        It means the parent commenter thinks “socialism with Chinese characteristics” looks an awful lot like state capitalism.

          • ebolapie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            Something tells me you already have an idea of what those words mean. I’m not here to have a debate, I just thought I could help with understanding the parent comment. I thought it was pretty obvious what calling Xi the CEO of China was implying.

    • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      Bro but they did it dictatorshiply 😭 in a real democracy you’d yell at them online, get arrested by Homeland Security, and politicians give them another 500 million in subsidies and tax breaks.

      • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        9 days ago

        Not sure. But the US just executed an innocent man, Marcellus Williams, just a few months ago.

        Some more US legal system fun facts!


        • The US currently operates a system of slave labor camps, including at least 54 prison farms involved in agricultural slave labor. Outside of agricultural slavery, Federal Prison Industries operates a multi-billion dollar industry with ~ 52 prison factories , where prisoners produce furniture, clothing, circuit boards, products for the military, computer aided design services, call center support for private companies. 1, 2, 3
        • The US has the highest incarceration rates in the world. Even individual US states outrank all other countries.
        • The War On Drugs, a policy of arrest and imprisonment targeting minorities, first initiated by Nixon, has over the years created a monstrous system of mass incarceration, resulting in the imprisonment of 1.5 million people each year, with the US having the most prisoners per capita of any nation. One in five black Americans will spend time behind bars due to drug laws. The war has created a permanent underclass of impoverished people who have few educational or job opportunities as a result of being punished for drug offenses, in a vicious cycle of oppression. 1, 2
        • In the present day, ICE (U.S._Immigration_and_Customs_Enforcement), the police tasked with immigration enforcement, operates over 200 prison camps, housing over 31,000 undocumented people deemed “aliens”, 20,000 of which have no criminal convictions, in the US system of immigration detention. The camps include forced labor (often with contracts from private companies), poor conditions, lack of rights (since the undocumented aren’t considered citizens), and forced deportations, often splitting up families. Detainees are often held for a year without trial, with antiquated court procedures pushing back court dates for months, encouraging many to accept immediate deportation in the hopes of being able to return faster than the court can reach a decision, but forfeiting legal status, in a cruel system of coercion. 1, 2
        • Over 90% of criminal trials in the US are settled not by a judge or jury, but with plea bargaining, a system where the defendant agrees to plead guilty in return for a concession from the prosecutor. It has been statistically shown to benefit prosecutors, who “throw the book” at defendants by presenting a slew of charges, manipulating their fear, who in turn accept a lesser charge, regardless of their innocence, in order to avoid a worst outcome. The number of potentially innocent prisoners coerced into accepting a guilty plea is impossible to calculate. Plea bargaining can present a dilemma to defense attorneys, in that they must choose between vigorously seeking a good deal for their present client, or maintaining a good relationship with the prosecutor for the sake of helping future clients. Plea bargaining is forbidden in most European countries. John Langbein has equated plea bargaining to medieval torture: “There is, of course, a difference between having your limbs crushed if you refuse to confess, or suffering some extra years of imprisonment if you refuse to confess, but the difference is of degree, not kind. Plea bargaining, like torture, is coercive. Like the medieval Europeans, the Americans are now operating a procedural system that engages in condemnation without adjudication.” 1
        • A grand jury is a special legal proceeding in which a prosecutor may hold a trial before the real one, where ~20 jurors listen to evidence and decide whether criminal charges should be brought. Grand juries are rarely made up of a jury of the defendant’s peers, and defendants do not have the right to an attorney, making them essentially show-trials for the prosecution, who often find ways of using grand jury testimony to intimidate the accused, such as leaking stories about grand jury testimony to the media to defame the accused. In the murders of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and Tamir Rice, all of whom were unarmed and killed by police in 2014, grand juries decided in all 3 cases not to pursue criminal trials against the officers. The US and Liberia are the only countries where grand juries are still legal. 1
        • The US system of bail (the practice of releasing suspects before their hearing for money paid to the court) has been criticized as monetizing justice, favoring rich, white collar suspects, over poorer people unable to pay for their release. 1
  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    8 days ago

    One is a regular person taking out a person of huge authority, balancing power.

    The other is the biggest authority taking out a smaller one to consolidate power.

    • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      8 days ago

      Consolidate ? he’s the leader of a 90 million strong party and been at the reins for more than 14 years lmao. I stg libs’ understanding of politics can be directly mapped to Harry Potter.

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          8 days ago

          He’s going around calling everyone that especially when it doesn’t fit because he just learned it’s an insult.

            • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              7 days ago

              Bet, it’s just been like a hundred comments of the same three talking points from liberals in .world. The reason it’s not just bad because it’s a “bigger authority” is because of the class character of the state, as well as the subject of the oppression. Lenin dedicated an entire book to the subject, State and Revolution. As to how it applies to China and why popular support among a revolutionary government despite capital and billionaires being allowed to exist, one of the best pieces I’ve ever read on the subject is this https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/

              It’s good that there’s a bigger authority than capital, the party rules through popular consent, and they chose Xi Jinping as well as the people that do the actual legwork of the anti corruption drive to be the executors of that will. If the US had a popular mandate that prevented corporate abuses, Luigi Mangione wouldn’t have needed to be incarcerated, he would have already gotten his surgery.

    • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      30
      ·
      7 days ago

      Please show your work. What is the proof that it was done to consolidate power?

      This isn’t to mention that your use of the word authority is strange. How exactly do you determine who has more authority between a US house representative vs. a CEO?

  • UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    8 days ago

    The former acted because he was personally affected by a person supporting exploitation within a liberal system, the latter leads an authoritarian regime that allowed their CEOs to do what they do until they got annoying for whatever reasons.

    So if you want to talk objective results here, sure, one of them got a higher kill count. However, who has the moral high ground here is not even up to debate IMO

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Luigi acted out of emotional response to individual trauma of a horribly cruel system, but very little will fundamentally change. The PRC punishes billionaires guilty of massive crimes, such as massive corruption. Which one does have the moral high ground, the one executing of his own volition in a manner that won’t change anything, or the justice system of another country repeatedly working in favor of the people?

      I’d say neither, if you start framing it in terms of morals and not material improvements for the working class you accept that Luigi didn’t change anything, just did what we all want to do. I’m against the.death penalty either way but I’d rather the working class be empowered overall.

    • _lunar@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      if by “annoying” you mean exploitative in ways that are tolerated in liberal systems but not in a sane, well-planned system that actually represents its people, sure

    • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      31
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      One has a 95% approval rate, which amounts to some 900 million working age adults alone, and is the leader of a party of over 93 million. His actions also don’t stop there, but rather continue in the monumental BRI uplifting hundreds of millions in Africa and Central Asia, as well as the total eradication of poverty in China and the development of twice as much green energy than the rest of the world combined.

      I liked Brian Thompson getting his due, absolutely, but let’s fucking pipe down lmao. The point was if y’all want to really stick it to CEOs, you better start organizing so y’all can get em in a way the pigs would be helpless to stop.

      allowed their CEOs to do what they do until they got annoying for whatever reasons.

      Again, libs just going by vibes and absolutely zero investigation, let alone evidence.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          Copying my comment over here, as it’s highly relevant:

          It’s more that liberals like yourself directly ignore facts and statistics while blindly repeating vague and unsourced claims of “China Bad,” because it lets you remain comfortable in your pre-existing worldview. Communists do not have such luxury, which is why they seemingly always have endless sources on hand. In your comment here, as an example, you discredit the CPC’s approval with no source. However, if we ask Harvard themselves about the results of their study, they say “We find that first, since the start of the survey in 2003, Chinese citizen satisfaction with government has increased virtually across the board. From the impact of broad national policies to the conduct of local town officials, Chinese citizens rate the government as more capable and effective than ever before. Interestingly, more marginalized groups in poorer, inland regions are actually comparatively more likely to report increases in satisfaction. Second, the attitudes of Chinese citizens appear to respond (both positively and negatively) to real changes in their material well-being, which suggests that support could be undermined by the twin challenges of declining economic growth and a deteriorating natural environment.” This directly goes against claims of “social credit” preventing this, moreover the “Orwellian Social Credit System” hinted at doesn’t even exist, at least not in the manner most think it does. Even more overtly, they state "Although state censorship and propaganda are widespread, our survey reveals that citizen perceptions of governmental performance respond most to real, measurable changes in individuals’ material well-being."

          You are directly decieving yourself because you license yourself to. If you actually looked at real sources and didn’t reject them reflexively, instead of accepting bourgeois media at face value, you’d sit much closer to where I do. You should read False Witnesses and Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing.” Both are excellent examples of why people don’t change their minds when seeing indisputable evidence, they willingly go along with narratives that they find more comfortable. It explains the outright anger liberals express when anticommunism is debunked. That doesn’t mean Communists don’t do the same thing, but as we live in a liberal dominated west (most likely, assuming demographics) this happens to a much lesser extent because liberalism is that which supplies these “licenses” to go along, while Communism requires hard work to begin to accept. This explains the mountains of sources Communists keep on hand, and the lack thereof from liberals who argue from happenstance and vibes.

        • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          The authoritarian Harvard and Pew polls which reported such a number? Lmao yall are so stubbornly committed to chauvinism even if a million Chinese came up to you to tell you you’d be unconvinced. There’s literally dozens of western polls which confirm it, it’s not up for debate, denying it is as ridiculous as denying the existence of the moon.

          Being incredibly adept at mental gymnastics isn’t critical thinking. What part of parroting the headlines you get from corporate media says “critical thinking” to you? I feel super bad for my American comrades trying to organize and make things better when half the country is somehow even dumber than this.

          • _lunar@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 days ago

            stormfront.world users downvoting facts when they don’t fit their racist vibes smh

            you hate to see it

      • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        8 days ago

        The one which has the high approval rate has a very good working relationship with billionaires which kisses the government’s feet, the type of government we will be seeing in the USA for the next four years.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          So if the government is run by a party people greatly approve of and said party dominates billionaires, who otherwise run rampant in countries like the US, this is a good thing and the people love it. However, you also expect a Communist revolution in the US for the next 4 years? What on Earth kind of fanfiction is this? How on Earth is Trump going to wrangle billionaires under him when the entire US state apparatus is designed from the ground up to represent billionaire interests?

          • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            who otherwise run rampant in countries like the US, this is a good thing

            Billionaires are not fine in any of the cases, neither when they run rampant or when they are subdued by the government to support their agenda and narrative. You can not take two bad cases A and B and then say B is not A therefore it is good. That is a logical fallacy.

            you also expect a Communist revolution in the US for the next 4 years?

            I don’t expect a communist revolution in the US for the next 4 years, all I am saying is that I expect them to subdue billionaires into obedience like China does. That is not communism to me. Whatever the overall arching goal of China and USA is for subduing millionaires, I think they meet in the common denominator: wanting have absolute control everything and I think there is a word for that kind of state.

            How on Earth is Trump going to wrangle billionaires under him when the entire US state apparatus is designed from the ground up to represent billionaire interests?

            Whether or not Trump will be able to achieve it we will see. But he can still do it in a way that represents billionaire interests: all he has to do is convince the billionaires that it is in their interest to support him. It will likely through mixtures of bribery and intimidation attempts. Of course billionaires might get threatened by him and try to burn him to the ground as well.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 days ago
              1. How do you get rid of Billionaires while remaining interlocked in a global economy and not suffer from Capital Flight and Brain Drain? Decouple and go the same way as the USSR? Ultraleftists like yourself reject Marx and let right take priority over what’s possible at the present moment, and risk the entire Socialist project.

              2. What has given you the impression that the US government can subdue Billionaires, let alone will? The last time Trump was in power the opposite was the case, and that has consistently been true for every presidency.

              3. This is silly. Trump is in this to get rich, his interests are in billionaires getting richer. He isn’t going to “subdue” anyone for those aims.

              • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                7 days ago

                1

                Interlocked in a global economy is an understatement for a country in which millions of its citizens work for US based multinational enterprises owned by billionaires. They are at this state organic extensions of each other, cut one out and the other likely dies. Very similar to clothing sector in India, Bangladesh etc but for other sectors (like electronics I suppose).

                The question you asked is a difficult one I will give you that. I have no dreams (well I mean sometimes I do but don’t believe the practicality of it) of getting rid of all billionaires all at once. It is a bit like cancer I guess which must operated on surgically. Going to a billionaire free society is one of the many possible pathways that can lead from subduing billionaires. But at this point all you are presenting me with is the possible good-will of Chinese government. A more simplest explanation is that it simply is a very authoritarian government.

                2

                Can? I don’t know. I believe Trump will try. And he will try precisely because of the reasons you have presented. US is run by billionaires, if you subdue billionaires then you are the most powerful man in US. I think Trump is deluded enough to try this given that Elon likely also shares the same goal with him, perhaps even more enthusiastic than Trump about it. As I said above, there may be many reasons why a government tries to subdue billionaires, getting rid of them is just one of many such reasons.

                3

                Well after you subdue the billionaires, it is entirely up to you to decide how to use that power. Trump will %100 sure use it to get more powerful himself, might even try to change things so that he can be a president the next term as well. In the simplest cases, he will make forced deals that will immensely benefit the businesses he owns (well now his sons “own” them if you believe that).

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  7 days ago
                  1. You are correct that the PRC’s economy is tied with the rest of the world. This is by design. The PRC witnessed the fall of the USSR in real time, and decided to take the opposite approach while still working towards Socialism: make themselves the producers of the world so the US can’t directly oppose them. This has paid off in spades. Further, what is “authoritarian?” What mechanically gives rise to that, why does it exist, and why is it bad? Is there an arbitrary level where democracy turns to authoritarianism?

                  2. I would love to see any proof behind this other than vibes. Until then, the logical conclusion is likely the correct one.

                  3. Same as 2, I would love to see any proof that isn’t just vibes.

      • recreationalcatheter@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        9 days ago

        I guess if you can survive the camps and can be virtuously re-educated you deserve to be a sycophant.

        So happy for them 🥳🙌 this means there wasn’t any crimes against humanity after all, must have all been a big western propaganda operation. 🤡

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          Western countries do not even pay the same level of lip service to their own minority populations, white people continue to dominate parliament and leadership roles in a manner that well overrepresents their makeup. Do you have sources for “crimes against humanity” that don’t originate with Adrian Zenz, a US State Department propagandist? The re-education program is complete already.

          You would do well to see why this story is so long-lasting despite a clear and odd lack of evidence, from UN inspectors finding no evidence to the ability to openly travel to Xinjiang, by reading The Xinjiang Atrocity Propaganda Blitz. Your attitude that the Uygur deputies must be sycophants and instead trust US State Department Propagandists over the people you claim to be fighting for is wildly chavanistic and racist. It’s one thing to have a hypothesis and investigate it further, it’s another thing entirely to assume its correct and doing no further investigation.

        • theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          9 days ago

          While I agree the concept of work is bad and we should do everything possible to make sure no one ever works again, jobs programs aren’t crimes against humanity. Neither are housing investment programs or schools

        • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          9 days ago

          Just because they didn’t pay you to spout nonsense doesn’t mean there’s not verifiable evidence that they have paid people to do it, it just means you’re gullible enough to do their legwork for free.

          Congress just approved a 1.5 billion anti china propaganda package lmao, it was in your fucking news, how do y’all not get it.

    • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      Are you dumb libs still claiming an Uyghur genocide despite being like 10 years, zero evidence, and multiple western sources calling out the atrocity propaganda? How does that look like, if Xinjiang’s economy is growing enormously, there’s tons of video evidence from travel bloggers of the bustling cultural and religious activities there? Plugging your eyes and ears to let the state department guide you doesn’t seem like a wise way to go about anything.

      The people boosting claims of an Uyghur genocide are still denying and aiding the fucking Palestinian genocide ffs.

        • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 days ago

          American liberals would only speak the truth if the state department told it to them for once lmao

          • GrammarPolice@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            9 days ago

            My source

            Now go ahead and try to discredit them that they’re a bourgeois run agency so their journalism is biased

            I had to make my point. The mods can proceed to ban this account too

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              9 days ago

              Cool, so now we have the idea that states pay influencers money. This still hasn’t translated to execution of billionaires being done out of opposition instead of mass corruption and breaking the law. You need to provide sources for your arguments, not justifications that they could be true.

              You are directly decieving yourself because you license yourself to. If you actually looked at real sources and didn’t reject them reflexively, instead of accepting bourgeois media at face value, you’d sit much closer to where I do. You should read False Witnesses and Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing.” Both are excellent examples of why people don’t change their minds when seeing indisputable evidence, they willingly go along with narratives that they find more comfortable. It explains the outright anger liberals express when anticommunism is debunked. That doesn’t mean Communists don’t do the same thing, but as we live in a liberal dominated west (most likely, assuming demographics) this happens to a much lesser extent because liberalism is that which supplies these “licenses” to go along, while Communism requires hard work to begin to accept. This explains the mountains of sources Communists keep on hand, and the lack thereof from liberals who argue from happenstance and vibes.

              • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                9 days ago

                Libs are probably not gonna read them but thanks for linking them because I will

              • GrammarPolice@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                9 days ago

                We both know the corruption claims were cover ups for the corporate witch-hunt. Also, you’re very aware of my readiness to change my views in the presence of convincing evidence. This evidence is however not so convincing.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 days ago

                  What do you mean “corporate witch hunt?” I believe the evidence of corruption is valid, do you have evidence to the opposite? Why do you say it isn’t convincing?

                  Furthermore, I believe you have displayed the exact opposite of being willing to change your views in the face of evidence, and have proven the articles I provided here quite accurate given your refusal to read any of the evidence I provided in our last conversation where you not only refused historical books, but even an 8 minute article.

                  You shattered any impression of openness back then, so you’ll forgive my lack of faith in you.

  • r_se_random@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    8 days ago

    I wonder if it has anything to do with PRC’s punishment towards citizens who have been critical of their government. Who knows man.

        • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          Thank you for your comment. From my skimming of the articles you sent, they seem to argue that the state has a track record of cracking down on dissent and protests.

          I’m not sure this proves your initial claim though (that CEO executions were done to combat government criticism), unless there’s a detail in these articles that I missed by skimming too fast. Please let me know if I missed it.

          While your claim is plausible, it is also equally plausible that they are acting within the defines of their state ideology, and we would need more evidence to prove it is one or the other.

          Disclaimer: I only skimmed the articles and did not attempt to verify the evidence they present, as it didn’t seem that they are addressing your initial claims.

          • r_se_random@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            I think you’ve misread my comment.

            “Xi doesn’t get the solidarity like Luigi, because his government has a track record of punishing citizens when they show dissent” was the point of my original comment.

            I believe this context is important if we’re to discuss the likability of a country’s leader based on their actions. Additionally, “acting within the defines of state ideology” would permit a national head to practically do anything since they are the ones defining the state ideology.

            • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 days ago

              With due respect, that’s quite different than the claim you explained in the comment I replied to, so I hope you will edit it to clarify that. edit: I seem to have misunderstood the original comment.

              As to the point you stated in quotes in this comment (edit: which is what OP originally intended), I don’t see how they’re related. Criticizing China’s crackdown on dissent must not mean you should deny their credit on executing CEOs.

              • Krauerking@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 days ago

                That wasn’t his point and he doesn’t need to edit his comment because you misunderstood it.

                • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  6 days ago

                  Upon rereading, it looks like I misunderstood it due to conflating it with some other comments, so you’re right. I apologize for the misunderstanding, and will edit my comment accordingly.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      8 days ago

      The people of the PRC approve of Beijing to a far greater degree than western countries, with an over 90% approval rate. If we ask Harvard themselves about the results of their study, they say “We find that first, since the start of the survey in 2003, Chinese citizen satisfaction with government has increased virtually across the board. From the impact of broad national policies to the conduct of local town officials, Chinese citizens rate the government as more capable and effective than ever before. Interestingly, more marginalized groups in poorer, inland regions are actually comparatively more likely to report increases in satisfaction. Second, the attitudes of Chinese citizens appear to respond (both positively and negatively) to real changes in their material well-being, which suggests that support could be undermined by the twin challenges of declining economic growth and a deteriorating natural environment.” This directly goes against claims of “social credit” preventing this, moreover the “Orwellian Social Credit System” hinted at doesn’t even exist, at least not in the manner most think it does. Even more overtly, they state "Although state censorship and propaganda are widespread, our survey reveals that citizen perceptions of governmental performance respond most to real, measurable changes in individuals’ material well-being."

    • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Again, unfalsifiable nonsense, both A and the opposite of A are proof that China bad, no need for evidence.

      What’s more, why do they have to be critical? What are they missing from their lives? Their government actually works lmao. More than 700 million pulled out of poverty, corrupt officials at all levels get jailed or executed, most young people own their house, everyone has a job and very cheap food and cultural activities, as well as the best public transit in the world and well maintained infrastructure, not to mention billionaires keep their fucking mouths shut unless it is to pay lip service to the people’s government.

      You know who punishes their citizens, verifiably often and viciously? Say it with me: the USA. The Ferguson protesters were murdered one by one in the following months with no investigation, the occupy wall street organizers were detained by Homeland security, the black panther party was infiltrated and their leaders murdered by police whether openly or covertly, the Gaza protests had students beaten, arrested and tried en masse and the US passes new surveillance and protest crackdown laws every other day it seems.

      And, on the opposite side, what good does “being allowed to be critical” do, in and of itself? About 30% of Americans approve of the government at any given time, corrupt officials are openly insider trading, passing laws for bribes that they don’t even have to hide, and big business is allowed to KILL YOU FOR PROFIT.

      You liberals are delusional, you buy that you live in the best country ever and shit is almost impossible to change for the better and assume the rest of us must have it so much worse, facts be damned.

      • Krauerking@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 days ago

        There are people upset enough with Chinese imperialism and rule that they light themselves on fire in the neighboring country as a way to try and get attention and assistance.
        That doesn’t come from nowhere even if it’s not a majority.

        Multiple things can be true such as different governments can be each doing their own form of abuse. It doesn’t excuse one to admit to the other and there can be positives to all relationships.

        Be upset with what you have and what’s around you but don’t use that to imagine a fantasy of greener grass on the other side of the fence. Do it to will a better existence around you.

        • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          8 days ago

          Chinese imperialism

          lmao, libs co opting revolutionary language without understanding a single fucking thing about it will never not be funny to me

          • Krauerking@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            8 days ago

            Yeah not a liberal and what would you call predatory loans to Africa and export systems of raw goods, or the annexation of Tibet, or the threatened annexation of Taiwan, or the skirmishes in the late 80s for the “South China Sea” which mainly cover reefs that have now been over fished, or even Russian, Tajikistan and Vietnamese land as recently as 2009?

            A word you think belonging to you doesn’t make it wrong to be used just because you don’t like it. It’s not even revolutionary just a Latin root word of ruling used for Napoleon using military to gain other counties support, and has been used in lots of ways by lots of people since.

            • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 days ago

              A red lib or a blue lib is still a lib. Even Bloomberg doesn’t buy the debt trap idiocy lmao. Washington mouthpiece The Atlantic doesn’t either. You want predatory loans? Look at the IMF. China regularly does no-strings-attached loans and regularly forgives hundreds of millions in loans that were interest free in the first place. China has NEVER seized an asset from a debtor. Poor way to do predatory loans, they should ask the US for advice if that’s the endgame.

              Most debt in Africa is held by western banks and the IMF, who demand you strip your economy for parts like the mafia (who probably got the idea from them). In Sri Lanka, the most quoted example, more than 90 percent of debt is owed to Western countries.

              • Krauerking@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                8 days ago

                Still not a liberal.

                And alright. I understand that other countries are more directly responsible for the economic woes of the world as that is the whole point of them and China is the manufacturer so their issues will be more worker treatment related than economic policy.

                You move on to whatever to protect your point of view. You are on a conquest to be self righteous rather than right.

                My point is don’t seek for other, seek for better. It’s not a golden paradise, just another reality that isn’t perfect, because it’s top busy being a reality.

      • r_se_random@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        I base my opinion on multiple people I personally know who moved from China to SG, because they were unhappy with the kind of control government maintained over any public criticism. I won’t pretend that I remember all the instances they’ve mentioned, but I know better than to reject the claims of the countries citizen when they have some concerns. I won’t pretend that I know better than the people living in the damned country.

        • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          8 days ago

          We all know Chinese people, dude, there’s 1.4 billion of them lmao. That doesn’t make you an authority on their opinion and the sample size is negligible to say the least. 95 percent of them, according to Harvard, are happy with the government.

          • r_se_random@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            I never claimed to be an authority, and there’s a reason I mentioned it was my opinion.

            And again, it’s not like there could be selection biases in a Harvard study. That absolutely never happens.

            • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 days ago

              And again, it’s not like there could be selection biases in a Harvard study. That absolutely never happens.

              Jesus dude, just admit that nothing could ever be enough to change your mind.

            • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              The only biases that Harvard could pull would be AGAINST the interests of the CPC, that’s the point. You wouldn’t accept a Chinese poll because of racism/chauvinism so I provide overwhelming proof even on your terms and the answer is “em, uh, nu uh”.

              • r_se_random@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                7 days ago

                My friend, you’re the one who’s actively denying the opinions of the Chinese people I know, while pushing a Harvard study on my face. And then calling me racist/chauvinistic. I am not sure how that helps your case, but I guess just spouting random nonsense is your idea of a conversation.

                To help you out, I have taken some time to find some of the articles from the time I was in SG, and cases I discussed. These are the articles.

                https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-64592333

                https://www.economist.com/china/what-peng-shuai-reveals-about-one-party-rule/21806441

                https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/14/dissidents-in-china-detained-and-harassed-as-beijing-prepares-for-party-congress

                Most of the people I talked to related with these incidents, and acknowledged that while they may not the be the norm, they’re certainly not anomalies. And a lot of people dont come out because the government reacts in such dracnonian ways.

                The people I talked to were not representative of all of China, it would be ridiculous to consider that. However, ignoring multiple unrelated people sharing similar stories would be an asinine thing.

                If your response is going to be a an aggregate study about economic development, and ask me why would people be unhappy with that, then you need some sort of help to understand that economic freedom is not the only freedom in the world.

                • Krauerking@lemy.lol
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  7 days ago

                  He specifically doesn’t want to hear anything that doesn’t confirm his world view and in being loud about it it’s getting him likes from his in-group which he thinks is all he needs and makes him superior.

                  You can see it in the way he responds to everyone with either the idea they fully agree with him or are deserving of indignation.

                  Wait till he finds out even his echo chamber doesn’t pass the purity test and God forbid he ever fail it himself.

                  Also I swear the amount of small business owners I know in Singapore who agree they live there for a better life is wild if you know anything about the authoritarian lean of Singapore. Grass is always greener and all that.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Won’t someone think of the poor billionaires?! 😭 Communism is scary… I don’t think I want the Proletariat to have power after all, those billionaires seem so cool and fun… /s

      • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        9 days ago

        Nothing is more terrifying to liberals, than a government having capitalists under their thumb, and serving the people, rather than the other way around as is normal in their “superior” capitalist dictatorships.

  • orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    9 days ago

    This thread is funny because it’s filled with a bunch of libs criticizing but bringing nothing of value to the table except vibes, and communists and comrades providing extensive source material to support their arguments, while avoiding low-hanging fruit like ad hominem.

    If you’ve ever done any sort of research into democratic socialism, you’d quickly learn that this is the way. Criticism and self-criticism are at the forefront of cadre training and will make you a better person. If you view a person trying to provide you with educational material as your enemy while you spout off vibe-driven nonsense, you’re not getting the picture and are still hindered by your country’s propaganda, as well your own apathy and ignorance. You’re criticizing people that are passionate because they see a chance to have a better world for all working class—you included—while responding with empty words.

    Unchain yourself from the criticisms of figures your country has implanted in you over your lifetime, and think in terms of ideas.

    • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      9 days ago

      and communists and comrades providing extensive source material to support their arguments, while avoiding low-hanging fruit like ad hominem.

      sorry I’m late

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      Really, I think anyone considering themselves a Leftist needs to read False Witnesses and Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing.” Both are excellent examples of why people don’t change their minds when seeing indisputable evidence, they willingly go along with narratives that they find more comfortable. It explains the outright anger liberals express when anticommunism is debunked. That doesn’t mean Communists don’t do the same thing, but as we live in a liberal dominated west (most likely, assuming demographics) this happens to a much lesser extent because liberalism is that which supplies these “licenses” to go along, while Communism requires hard work to begin to accept. This explains the mountains of sources Communists keep on hand, and the lack thereof from liberals who argue from happenstance and vibes.

      • davel@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        Huh, I’ve come across this False Witness article before, years ago.

        In retrospect, this desperate, shotgun appeal to religious authority demonstrated why the dossier itself was probably futile. It was an acknowledgment that the people they were attempting to convince were beyond the reach of mere fact or reason — people who did not find reality compelling.

        This reminds me of the requisite Parenti quote:

        During the Cold War, the anti-communist 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.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Unchain yourself from the criticisms of figures your country has implanted in you over your lifetime, and think in terms of ideas.

      Realistically, that’s not gonna happen for most people. Hear me out:

      In 1500s when the printing press was invented, Martin Luther (not to be confused with Martin Luther King) saw the opportunity to print “bibles for everyone” to transform everybody into a priest - an enlightened being that always (or at least mostly) does the good/right thing.

      We know from history that that didn’t succeed. Not everybody turned into a priest, not even close. Instead, he caused Evangelism, and is partially causal for the Thirty Years’ War.

      Realistically, people thinking in terms of ideas is an inclination you’re born with (or so I believe). There’s just a lot of people who are not gonna do that. Especially if people see themselves at a (economic) disadvantage because of it. Most people just wanna live through ordinary life.


      BTW, I guess something similar happened with the internet. When the internet was first invented, people guessed that it would lead to the total education of all human beings. Instead, it has caused smartphones, “social” media (which is more antisocial media tbh), and a lot of spreading dumb narratives. So i’m not sure it really “enlightened” the people.

  • carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    8 days ago

    One isn’t a corrupt dictator killing or imprisoning anyone who complains about him. If you think the little guy isn’t getting hurt in China I want the drugs you’re on.