Have some humillity kid, you think you know more about the subject than us that been reading about this for years? Or more than the actual chinese communists that have been working towards communism for decades? 😂 You literally just read the Wikipedia entries.
I haven’t only read Wikipedia, I’ve read things such as interviews from former Chinese citizens saying that Google was banned, and on their search engine the tiennamen square never existed. Also, how is China becoming more communist? The government getting profits from wage-slavery isn’t becoming more communist, it’s becoming the center of capitalism. Even if the government weren’t making direct profits from wage-labor, they still make profits from things like taxes and corporations buying land. When the government is making profits from capitalism, they won’t go socialist.
And here the smug lib employs the “one word response” tactic, where they ignore everything you’ve said in your attempt to educate them so they can give a snappy comeback, which makes them believe they’ve won the argument.
And this one, a classic tankie argument, where they don’t engage in what I said but rather its format, thereby not acknowledging that I was engaging in hyperbole, not saying that the Chinese government erased mention of the landmark.
Oh look, what is it? The report of the State Council published on June 25, 1989 about the protests, from gov.cn themselves!
saying that Google was banned
Oh no how horrible, literally 1997. Can’t live without my google, especially when I don’t have a much better replacement such as Baidu. Nope, don’t exist. Only Google. Well, since 1998 only.
Are you denying that Google is a repository of information. Even duckduckgo is banned. They’re not even close to a monopoly. I’m making the point that they’re restricting information.
Also I’d be happy to read article 590 if you could provide me with an English translation.
how is banning Google restricting information and why did you not touch on the State Council report about the 1989 Beijing protests?
Since there is an edit: you can OCR the document and run it into an online translator. The State Council of the People’s Republic of China writes, understandably, in Chinese.
I’ve read things such as interviews from former Chinese citizens saying that Google was banned, and on their search engine the tiennamen square never existed.
So what? They banned google as protectionism, this way their infant tech sector didn’t have to compete with an already established monopoly. Now China has their own alternatives to all these google services, and the profits of these industries don’t go to the West but stay in China. Plus the infrastructure is in China so it’s not a security risk.
Also, how is China becoming more communist? The government getting profits from wage-slavery isn’t becoming more communist, it’s becoming the center of capitalism. Even if the government weren’t making direct profits from wage-labor, they still make profits from things like taxes and corporations buying land. When the government is making profits from capitalism, they won’t go socialist.
China is in an early stage of socialism, with a primary goal of developing the productive forces. They have introduced market elements into their economy in a controlled manner to accelerate their development of the productive forces. Taxes don’t banish into politicians pockets, financial paradises or into the MIC like in the west, it goes into development.
Communism is a stage of development, you can’t just push a button and become communist, it is a process that takes decades of work and correct policy to build.
You do know the Tiennamen square is the literal most famous place in China right?
It’s the place where there is this super famous building that is one of the country’s symbol and that almost every content about China ever can’t help but have at least one picture of.
So saying that the name of the place is censored in China is completely ridiculous.
As pointed out by others, the event that you are referring to is known in China as the june 4th incident so yes, of course if you type Tiennamen in the search bar you won’t find it, when you look up something on a non-english website maybe try to look up how the thing you’re looking for is called in the site’s language instead of assuming it’s called the same way in english you westernbrained monkey.
I know what you mean. But I am going to take it at it’s litteral value, because it is so much funnier to think that someone said “Tiananmen square doesn’t exist”
China’s workers don’t control the capital, live under a dictatorship, and corporations do most of their manufacturing in China. They’re as socialist as the national-socialists.
Marxism-leninism has routinely been shown to not work. China doesn’t have a command economy or worker-controlled capital. If China’s people were free, they could access the internet. Furthermore, how is secret police a tenet of the Chinese freedom I’ve had shoved down my throat by Marxist-Leninists? Furthermore, how are the Uyghur people bourgeois?
Let me simplify this. A lot of people in this thread were justifying oppression saying it was for the people. I’m not saying that Muslims are bourgeois, I’m saying that the Uyghur genocide is unjustified as they’re not antagonized to the proletariat, but rather an ethnic group.
Virtually everything you state is false. China does not technically have a command economy, but this is not necessary for socialism in the first place. China engages in plenty of economic planning, far more so than capitalist states. That is precisely why China can build 45,000 km of unprofitable high-speed rail in less than 20 years and install more solar generation capacity than all other countries combined in 2023.
Industries in China are also far more worker-controlled than they are in capitalist states. Estimates for the level of state-ownership range from 20-40%. Much of the remaining “private sector” is composed of worker cooperatives. Search up “Farmer specialized cooperatives”, which comprise of more than 100 million households (not people, households).
As for the Uyghur thing, even western media has largely abandoned that point since it was too easy to see that no one was being killed. I mean, you can buy a plane ticket to Xinjang right now and see for yourself. Now the smarter ones have downgraded it to “cultural genocide”. In a few years, when the Uyghur language and culture will still be around just fine, they will quiet drop the whole topic.
Have you not heard of the great firewall. Do you think Nike and iPhone factories are coops? Furthermore genocide does not explicitly have to be killing civilians. Xi did things such as forcefully reeducate children, force Muslims to eat pork, and forcefully sterilize them, thereby making them and their culture die out.
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_China
See folks, here we have an example of a liberal who mistakes “repeating something a bunch” for a fact. Sadly, their brain worms are so numerous that they have a terminal case of the “smug” and are incapable of understanding that they could in fact, be wrong or misinformed about something. This is an important cautionary tale to all of us to ensure good mental hygiene before we end up like this poor fellow, who sadly, is beyond help at this point.
You call me wrong, yet don’t bring a source to debunk me. You call me smug, yet speak of me as if I’m an animal. I will say the Communist tendency to hate liberals is why this movement has yet to succeed in the US. You seem incapable of knowing that liberals are just more mild versions of communists and if we want marxist movements we must move within a big tent party, since we don’t have large enough numbers to do anything within any democratic country.
Freedom of a populace is not measured by access to the Internet but rather by what their government does to improve their material conditions, such as housing. I support the freedom to live inside a house, not the freedom to be homeless after a 1000$ misfortune, like in the U.S.
I personally view it as that if you can’t allow people to see other viewpoints, then material conditions don’t matter. As John Stuart Mill said in On Liberty, the person’s ability to choose for themself is more important than an alleged better living condition. Furthermore, I see that if China were so much better, they would let their people see the alternative. By not letting their people see something they allege is worse, they prove it is better.
Bro, you have to be trolling
Nope, just educated. We’d be happy to explain it to you if you’re interesting in understanding the meme.
Nearly all MLs I’ve seen considering China Communist convinces me you’re not educated.
Reading Mao and Deng’s Selected Works only for a smug liberal to call you uneducated, the struggle is real
Right 😭😭😭😭 like damn guess it’s time to pack it up
Have some humillity kid, you think you know more about the subject than us that been reading about this for years? Or more than the actual chinese communists that have been working towards communism for decades? 😂 You literally just read the Wikipedia entries.
I haven’t only read Wikipedia, I’ve read things such as interviews from former Chinese citizens saying that Google was banned, and on their search engine the tiennamen square never existed. Also, how is China becoming more communist? The government getting profits from wage-slavery isn’t becoming more communist, it’s becoming the center of capitalism. Even if the government weren’t making direct profits from wage-labor, they still make profits from things like taxes and corporations buying land. When the government is making profits from capitalism, they won’t go socialist.
not even close, really demolishing your own credibility and claims to have read anything
天安门工厂 is a place, not an event. btw in China it’s called “June 4th Incident” and common knowledge, easily findable on Baidu.
The Tiananmen Square ‘Massacre’: The West’s Most Persuasive, Most Pervasive Lie.
Hyperbole.
And here the smug lib employs the “one word response” tactic, where they ignore everything you’ve said in your attempt to educate them so they can give a snappy comeback, which makes them believe they’ve won the argument.
-checks another one off the bingo list-
And this one, a classic tankie argument, where they don’t engage in what I said but rather its format, thereby not acknowledging that I was engaging in hyperbole, not saying that the Chinese government erased mention of the landmark.
keeps sucking my own dick -
Maybe you should do your own research. Open report number 590 on this page: https://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2011-11/09/content_1989024.htm
Oh look, what is it? The report of the State Council published on June 25, 1989 about the protests, from gov.cn themselves!
Oh no how horrible, literally 1997. Can’t live without my google, especially when I don’t have a much better replacement such as Baidu. Nope, don’t exist. Only Google. Well, since 1998 only.
Are you denying that Google is a repository of information. Even duckduckgo is banned. They’re not even close to a monopoly. I’m making the point that they’re restricting information. Also I’d be happy to read article 590 if you could provide me with an English translation.
how is banning Google restricting information and why did you not touch on the State Council report about the 1989 Beijing protests?
Since there is an edit: you can OCR the document and run it into an online translator. The State Council of the People’s Republic of China writes, understandably, in Chinese.
I was wondering if something like that would lose some meaning as things like that are infamously inaccurate.
So what? They banned google as protectionism, this way their infant tech sector didn’t have to compete with an already established monopoly. Now China has their own alternatives to all these google services, and the profits of these industries don’t go to the West but stay in China. Plus the infrastructure is in China so it’s not a security risk.
China is in an early stage of socialism, with a primary goal of developing the productive forces. They have introduced market elements into their economy in a controlled manner to accelerate their development of the productive forces. Taxes don’t banish into politicians pockets, financial paradises or into the MIC like in the west, it goes into development.
Communism is a stage of development, you can’t just push a button and become communist, it is a process that takes decades of work and correct policy to build.
No decommodification, no worker owned capital. The US is in an early version of socialism too I guess.
Edit: guys it’s called sarcasm
You see why reading the books is important? Cause you avoid saying dumb shit like this
Edit: mans said they were being sarcastic, cause sarcasm is when you’re just straight up incorrect and can’t back it up lmao
aight little bro tell me how that works out
You do know the Tiennamen square is the literal most famous place in China right?
It’s the place where there is this super famous building that is one of the country’s symbol and that almost every content about China ever can’t help but have at least one picture of.
So saying that the name of the place is censored in China is completely ridiculous.
As pointed out by others, the event that you are referring to is known in China as the june 4th incident so yes, of course if you type Tiennamen in the search bar you won’t find it, when you look up something on a non-english website maybe try to look up how the thing you’re looking for is called in the site’s language instead of assuming it’s called the same way in english you westernbrained monkey.
It’s literally in the country official coat of arms that is used everywhere lol
I know what you mean. But I am going to take it at it’s litteral value, because it is so much funnier to think that someone said “Tiananmen square doesn’t exist”
So you’re not interested in learning why people will say things like that? Enjoy being a smug dumbass then.
China’s workers don’t control the capital, live under a dictatorship, and corporations do most of their manufacturing in China. They’re as socialist as the national-socialists.
You have shown no interest in listening to us, so I am not going to waste my time talking to you.
To any lurkers though, this counters their “gotcha” argument quite well: https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/
that was a great read. thank you
Marxism-leninism has routinely been shown to not work. China doesn’t have a command economy or worker-controlled capital. If China’s people were free, they could access the internet. Furthermore, how is secret police a tenet of the Chinese freedom I’ve had shoved down my throat by Marxist-Leninists? Furthermore, how are the Uyghur people bourgeois?
I think it’s pretty cute that you try to use Marxist terminology without understanding it. I’m sincere 🥰
This is easily a top 3 all time dunk, i can’t stop laughing.
Let me simplify this. A lot of people in this thread were justifying oppression saying it was for the people. I’m not saying that Muslims are bourgeois, I’m saying that the Uyghur genocide is unjustified as they’re not antagonized to the proletariat, but rather an ethnic group.
Virtually everything you state is false. China does not technically have a command economy, but this is not necessary for socialism in the first place. China engages in plenty of economic planning, far more so than capitalist states. That is precisely why China can build 45,000 km of unprofitable high-speed rail in less than 20 years and install more solar generation capacity than all other countries combined in 2023.
Industries in China are also far more worker-controlled than they are in capitalist states. Estimates for the level of state-ownership range from 20-40%. Much of the remaining “private sector” is composed of worker cooperatives. Search up “Farmer specialized cooperatives”, which comprise of more than 100 million households (not people, households).
As for the Uyghur thing, even western media has largely abandoned that point since it was too easy to see that no one was being killed. I mean, you can buy a plane ticket to Xinjang right now and see for yourself. Now the smarter ones have downgraded it to “cultural genocide”. In a few years, when the Uyghur language and culture will still be around just fine, they will quiet drop the whole topic.
They can
Have you not heard of the great firewall. Do you think Nike and iPhone factories are coops? Furthermore genocide does not explicitly have to be killing civilians. Xi did things such as forcefully reeducate children, force Muslims to eat pork, and forcefully sterilize them, thereby making them and their culture die out. Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_China
See folks, here we have an example of a liberal who mistakes “repeating something a bunch” for a fact. Sadly, their brain worms are so numerous that they have a terminal case of the “smug” and are incapable of understanding that they could in fact, be wrong or misinformed about something. This is an important cautionary tale to all of us to ensure good mental hygiene before we end up like this poor fellow, who sadly, is beyond help at this point.
You call me wrong, yet don’t bring a source to debunk me. You call me smug, yet speak of me as if I’m an animal. I will say the Communist tendency to hate liberals is why this movement has yet to succeed in the US. You seem incapable of knowing that liberals are just more mild versions of communists and if we want marxist movements we must move within a big tent party, since we don’t have large enough numbers to do anything within any democratic country.
Freedom of a populace is not measured by access to the Internet but rather by what their government does to improve their material conditions, such as housing. I support the freedom to live inside a house, not the freedom to be homeless after a 1000$ misfortune, like in the U.S.
I personally view it as that if you can’t allow people to see other viewpoints, then material conditions don’t matter. As John Stuart Mill said in On Liberty, the person’s ability to choose for themself is more important than an alleged better living condition. Furthermore, I see that if China were so much better, they would let their people see the alternative. By not letting their people see something they allege is worse, they prove it is better.
It’s one of those hot takes that ends up being true the more you look into it.