There is also this great paper by Grover Furr talking about the Katyn Massacre. It was one of my first glimpses into history that made be begin to question whether what was said ab the ussr was true

https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/research/furr_katyn_preprint_0813.pdf

The tsarist pogroms against Jews which the USSR ended??? Judeo-Bolshevism?

I love how everyone loves to forget how the ussr ended so many genocides. It’s total historical revisionism and people get away with it bc gommunism=bad, so no one challenges or has the capacity to challenge them bc history is a taboo.

Drug regulation for sure. But no criminalization for use. Substance prohibitions have always had horrible effects. It’s beyond a shadow of a doubt that criminalizing substance abuse only creates worse methods of consumption. Regulation is highly agreeable. It’s good to provide safe ways for consuming drugs. Especially for addicts.

Not all drugs are created equal, entheogens have provable medical and therapeutic use. Their use should be encouraged for healthy adults with proper education on the matter. A license for use, so to speak. Same for cannabidiols.

Coke, opiate powder and methamphetamine should be tightly regulated, clandestine synthesis should be illegal, but in organic form, coca use should be completely ignored and legal like coffee. You aren’t going to die by chewing coca leaves unless you make yourself like a 10k salad. Alcohol and nicotine are some of the worst drugs and should be highly regulated as today.

Ultimately, it is impossible to control people’s substance use or abuse, and when the grip is too tight on them, you make criminals out of the people, their suffering and automatically create black markets for lumpen proles. People become addicts because they are vulnerable and in need and they will provide their vice on either side of the law. The lowest bar is for the state to provide safe products and contexts for users to reduce harm and encourage healing.

I wouldn’t engage with them without sourcing your claims, and if they source claims, breakdown their bias. Esp if it’s RFA or NED/wiki related. I would also not debate these kinds of people when they’re clearly so brainwashed and willfully ignorant. A debate then is about who is more “convincing” more than who is correct. It becomes a mind game more than a conversation. Don’t fall for their dumb mind games. Don’t participate.

The worst part about being a leftist is that we always have to do 10x more homework than any lib. So, you can’t sound unsure or humble about what you know. It’s provable that the genocide is a fabrication. No doubt about it. And America imprisons millions of black people. It doesn’t have to hide it because the status quo doesn’t give a f-ck about black people. It also has concentration camps on the border. No need to hide it. As long as we can criminalize a minority population, liberals will concede to their oppression. America also has glorified concentration camps with casinos called reservations. No one gives a shit. Regardless of what China says or does, the facts are in their favor, and american liberals have zero authority with which to talk about genocide when they actively consent and participate in it.

No offense but that lib “friend” or whatever is a complete loser and a hollow person if they are so sinophobic.

“Only evil Chinese are capable of hiding genocide. We’re too good and much better than the y*llows. Our institutions our superior.”

Is pretty much what that person was saying. And it’s a pretty horrible thing to say.

How exhausting. And hostile. If you’re so convinced by yourself, then why are you even writing on this website?

If it works and it’s not war communism, it’s revisionism and anti-marx. Got it. The CPC has done more for its people and the earth than you ever will in your life. So, come back when you run a successful revolution, and establish the largest communist and political party on Earth. You are from the imperial core, right? You got your work cut out for you.

You could work on your social and argumentative skills. Here’s my suggestion. Read “ON THE CORRECT HANDLING OF CONTRADICTIONS AMONG THE PEOPLE” It’s by Mao Tse-tung That should help you figure out what you want to say to convince other comrades of your point of view instead of debasing yourself online.

Edit: stop cherry-picking 🙄 Look up Guo Wengui. He is a billionaire in exile in Manhattan. Jack Ma also was openly hostile to the CPC and then he “disappeared” for three months. Like, no capitalist nation controls their billionaires so publicly. It’s clear that they only exist because the CPC finds their role useful in developing its economy. China is still a very economically modest nation. 10,500.40 USD GDP per capita.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-larger-meaning-of-chinas-crackdown-on-school-tutoring/amp

https://www.who.int/china/health-topics/universal-health-coverage

http://en.people.cn/n3/2018/0504/c90000-9456411.html

http://en.people.cn/n3/2022/0729/c90000-10128877.html

You miss the forest for the trees. It is not any one isolated fact that makes China socialist. It’s all of them, combined. You may have your private opinion about things, but China is run by a communist party, they uphold communist ideology and seek common prosperity for their citizens. China was, before deng, a very poor, and relatively weak nation. I don’t personally agree with every single detail of the Chinese economy or society, but that’s just what happens when things exist outside of our imagination. It doesn’t fit our ideal. They are not communist Albania, they are not DPRK, or Cuba. Deng’s China had to exist in a hostile, capitalist-dominated world. It was adapt or die. The USSR had been dying and reforming into oblivion. However, I see that China is slowly rolling back capitalist reforms and influence, and seeks prosperity for their people in a democratic and revolutionary way. It’s clear capitalism is a tool of the people and not their cudgel, albeit there is a lot of work remaining to completely remove it.

I’ve read your other comments and you are spouting the same propagandistic nonsense that RFA, RFE, and NED do. All of which are funded by CIA. You’re really going to side with Imperialist intelligence before Socialist China? I think you have plenty of unlearning you have to do. But unfortunately, I trust you will not listen.

I think a case could have been made in the past, but I think it is pretty clear it is not capitalist based on the fact that:

1. they execute corrupt businessmen and such, open hostility and control of major corporative class members.
2. State-owned Enterprises(SOEs) are a huge part of the economy. These enterprises exist as an arm of the state and function within the global capitalist ideological context. I firmly believe that if SOEs existed without a corporative or business structure, and strictly as a nationalized corporation, they would be subject to major sanctions by the imperial core.
3. their major achievements in social equity, and eradicating extreme poverty.
4. The open eradication of huge sectors like the private tutoring business which was pretty much abolished overnight because it was considered exploitative of parents and children.

Conclusion: China has had to adopt capitalist structures in order to survive within a world that would have ruthlessly crushed it otherwise. To that extent, China has consistently used such structures in a practical purpose and has not shown signs of wavering in any sense away from socialism. In fact, China has been enhancing socialist structures of economic control and political practice. Even going so far as to encourage the development of Marxist parties and theory around the world. Therefore it is not capitalist. I would argue that their development is an existential threat to capitalist ideology as a brutal and outdated form of organizing society, governments and economies.

I forgot to add that this is what I have observed and studied as an outsider. Please feel free to correct me or add any details that I have missed. I also forgot to mention that their 95% approval rate of the CPC is consistent with the idea that the party should serve the people and not the bourgeoisie. A fact that is in firm alignment with Marxist and Leninist principles.