Nothing wrong with communists. I feel so radicalized by capitalism I’m almost there anyway.
It’s the Russian/China apologists that are annoying.
Russia is bad, Chia.na is bad, and the U.S. is bad. All those things can be true. But all the insufferable posts about how great China and Russia are, and all the bad things you have heard about them m are just Western propaganda…
If they were serious about their ideology, then why do they care so much about someone thinks about China or Russia.
If they didn’t brigade those issues so much, straight up ban people, just because they disagree, or hlrefuse to have any real discussion that doesn’t center on just shutting other people down, then maybe people outside their group might take them more seriously.
This isn’t terrible, but it’s important to be aware that the class analysis and definition of capitalism in this is nonsense. The capitalist class is not just “rich people” and the working class is not just “poor people.” Capitalism is not defined by…whatever this attempts to define it by. Capital is the power to prioritize the allocation of resources and labor.
Capitalism stands for the idea that the purpose of all value, surplus and base really, of production is to increase the capital of the holders of capital. That is it. It is the worship of allocative power solely for the sake of allocative power. And that’s why it inevitably degenerates into fascism–the worship of power solely for the sake of power.
All class dynamics must oriented themselves within the structure of that allocative power analysis. The capitalist class is not “rich” people, or at least not definitionally, and the working class is not poor people. The capitalist class are those who derive increase to their allocative power primarily from the direction of capital under the capitalist system. On the flip side, working class is anyone who increases their own allocative power primarily through the application of their own labor. The vague vibes based class analysis in this would effectively place servers (like, at a restaurant) as bourgeoisie capitalist-class/adjacent just like doctors, lawyers, programmers, and the like. I think it’s clear why that maybe feels like complete bullshit to most peeps.
He’s very much aware of what capitalism is and clearly doesn’t just believe it to be “rich people”. What nonsense.
But it is not only the worker and the farmer who are exploited and forced to give up the greater part of their product to the capitalists, to those who have monopolized the land, the railroads, the factories, the machinery, and all natural resources. The entire country, the whole world is made to pay tribute to the kings of finance and industry.
The small business man depends on the wholesaler; the wholesaler on the manufacturer; the manufacturer on the trust magnates of his industry; and all of them on the money lords and banks for their credit. The big bankers and financiers can put any man out of business by just withdrawing their credit from him. They do so whenever they want to squeeze any one out of business. The business man is entirely at their mercy. If he does not play the game as they want it, to suit their interests, then they simply drive him out of the game.
Thus the whole of mankind is dependent upon and enslaved by just a handful of men who have monopolized almost the entire wealth of the world, but who have themselves never created anything.
He literally says the bourgeoisie, namely doctors, lawyers, and the like, are, in their interests, aligned with the capitalist class if not altogether a part of it. And even the parts you quote are hard to parse as they are both focused on the outputs of production rather than the allocative power leading to production but also touch upon the problem of how our overly financialized economies obfuscate the allocative power issue. At the same time, when he says shit like “the business man is entirely at [the big bankers financiers] mercy” it makes me think we are not on the same page here, unless his definition of business man is not the investor class–absolutely capitalist class–business man I use.
Nobody thinks Russia is even socialist anymore, this is an absurd strawman. Marxist-Leninists believe China to be socialist and run by a communist party, because public ownership is the principal aspect of the PRC’s economy and the working classes control the state.
yes but: “communist party” does not mean “achieved communism.” we all know that. they are working toward a goal, a goal I agree with, but we all know they are still caps. for the time being.
Between capitalism and communism lies the transition between the two, called socialism. China is socialist, as public ownership is the principal aspect of the economy, and the working classes control the state. In capitalism, private ownership is principal and capitalists control the state.
China and russia being communist is an American right wing talking point.
No leftists consider the russian federation communist, and not even the cpc considers china communist. They claim to be attempting to realise communism by first developing socialism to the point that they can.
Whether you believe them or not aside, you’re sort of showing your ignorance. Even the scary tankies on hexbear and ml or whatever don’t think they’re communist. That’s why the term actually existing socialism (aes) is aes and not aec.
i made no indication i believed them or them to be communist. i was speaking of how trollish
those who claim china/russia is communist are. they’re almost always “libertarians” or some form of boomer.
No leftists […] even the cpc considers china communist. They claim to be attempting to realise communism by first
tl;dr of my response: China ain’t Socialist, and shouldn’t be emulated in our struggle for socialist revolution worldwide.
Many leftists don’t consider China and the CPC to even be socialist, many socialists around the world see the CPC as a ruling class of another capitalist country, albeit with much higher rates of nationalised industries.
We think you can’t really call yourself socialist when the workers don’t have meaningful democratic control over society. And unless you’re being dishonest or are just misinformed, the workers most certainly don’t have control of society in China. Less so then here (Australia), even.
One only need to talk to people in China to realise this, most people I’ve spoken to in China, even though who support the government, describe a very hierarchical benevolent government.
One simply can’t look a lefty in the eye and say China is socialist, unless those “Chinese Characteristics” suffixed to “Socialism” simply stand for “without democracy”.
There is no meaningful method to agitate for political change (no, being in one of the other parties most certainly doesn’t count), there are no workers unions (strikes are heavily repressed and the only union that exists is controlled by the CPC, though despite that some groups of workers still sometimes bravely strike 💪) no freedom of political association, no democracy in the workplace.
It’s really hard to claim China is socialist, yet people outside of China still do, just because they’re holding the banner of socialism…
I don’t hate China, it’s a pretty nice place, with lovely people, and certainly a nicer place than the shithole of the US. I’ve been to China multiple times, and you wouldn’t catch me dead in the US.
But they just ain’t Socialist, and shouldn’t be emulated in our struggle for revolution worldwide.
Public ownership is the principal aspect of China’s economy, and the working classes control the state. There’s hierarchy, sure, but socialism is not against hierarchy in all cases. Socialism is simply a transitional mode of production between capitalism and communism where the working classes are in charge, and that’s true of China.
I think that’s a bit reductive. While I am a sceptic that they’ll ever really succeed and think they’ve fucked themselves a bit with how much power Chinese tech companies have been allowed to amass, there are true believers among the party and the central committee. I mean they teach Marxism in school (sort of).
In general chinese people describe extremely high satisfaction with their government, and respond more positively to questions like “If I have an issue I can go to my local politician and resolve it”[1] than Westminster derived systems (which I would also not dignify with the word democracy) and it is worth asking why this holds while most so called democracies have hostile and parasitic governments.
If the will of the people is enacted then this is a sort of democracy, while if you vote and then the people you elect serve elites and ignore you this isn’t really democratic.
Structurally some things in China are working vastly better than elsewhere, and it’s worth trying to understand /why/ their government seems to work for the people so much more than other systems.
But I was merely relaying what they claim about themselves to point out even people fully committed to toeing their party line would not call them communist.
No leftists consider the russian federation communist, and not even the cpc considers china communist. They claim to be attempting to realise communism by first developing socialism to the point that they can.
Hexbear and .ml are really this weird, yeah. They don’t even pretend to be socialist yet they just insist it’s AES.
I’m fine with someone having a negative opinion of China so long as they don’t use that as a purity test and demand everyone else denounce China, calling people “fascists” or “tankies” and refusing to work with them otherwise.
Obviously, the vast majority of people on here don’t live in China, and we generally have bigger fish to fry domestically to worry about meddling in their affairs. I would turn the question around and ask why people are so invested in making sure everyone sufficiently condemns China instead of working together to address the more pressing matter of class conflict.
If they didn’t brigade those issues so much, straight up ban people, just because they disagree, or hlrefuse to have any real discussion that doesn’t center on just shutting other people down, then maybe people outside their group might take them more seriously.
This is exactly how I feel about a lot of anti-China spaces. It’s difficult to have a real discussion about almost any topic related to China because if you suggest that anything about them isn’t the worst thing ever you get accused of being a fascist and dismissed, if not banned. If .ml goes too far in the other direction, then it is at least somewhat unique in doing so, and it’s worthwhile to have a space where non-mainstream perspectives can be discussed.
Some of us are just tired of western people not wanting to get a little nuance about none western countries. And the instance you admit that ofcourse no place is perfect you get hit with. “See x is bad, communism can’t work in reality.” It is tiresome and eventually I end up defaulting to standard answers or blocking people if they are rude.
On top of that I do think it is amazing how for instance India, China and Vietnam has improved the lives of billions, but every single time it hit western news it is followed by “but at what price”.
And finally I have realized that things are not always as they seem and the propaganda machine makes it hard to discern the reality of many things. This goes for everything. I have no clue if it actually is dangerous to go USA or it just seem that way.
It kinda is though. You have to worry about scammers/pickpockets/hustlers/gangs in a couple or spots (although they mostly stick to murdering each other).
Pickpocketing is not a thing in America. Too subtle. We are a mugging people. However, I will say that your chances of encountering gang violence as a tourist/traveler are quite low. The main danger when visiting here is the government/police.
Based on this thread I think I will stay my horses. No fun in that kind worry for what would have been a once in a life time experience.
Also I find it interesting I get 7 downvotes for answering OP in good faith. Lemmy is not Reddit and I am happy for it, but there are a lot of trenches here
The Soviet Union collapsed because it essentially was an end game capitalistic system. With very few owners, one could argue one owner. It’s the aspiring goal of unchecked capitalism.
Russia then replaced it, with an umbrella of oligarchs and most Western countries. Most notably the US. Has copied a similar system, it’s rotten to the core.
We’re not going to see an improvement of our current system, before an elite class in one society is removed. Personally I think the US, UK or China will see the first uprising.
We need to either tax capital higher than base yields or tax death/inheritance to a degree generational wealth can’t occur.
Everything points to capitalism being the best system we know of, but we need to counter the problems that arises from it.
Just like checking but what economic system drove the worst era of colonialism and slavery ever seen, the worst wars and arms proliferation in human history, ecocide on a big-rocks-from-space scale, pollution emissions on a earth-is-volcanoes-now scale, the worst industrial accidents ever, the worst deliberate adulteration of goods ever, and has required constant warfare to sustain it?
I once got at least 10 comments telling me how good russia and china are and how bad USA is and that i am a USA sucker, welp kinda my fault for making a comment in the wrong instance
Yeah sure. And the way in how peace is preferable to endless imperialist proxy wars.
And the way how reality is preferable to fantasy. How woke is preferable to asleep. Like acknowledging that the CIA funded the coup by far right elements in Ukraine. Like they did plenty of times before all over the word! But facts are only selected among alternative facts if they serve politics in this post truth world. Nothing can be true that could lead to diplomacy and acknowledging “this is partially our fault”.
Because if we acknowledged the historical facts and that Russia just might genuinely feel threatened by NATO we could move forward with diplomacy to end this war.
All I see when I look at “leftists” today is the image of nazis endlessly screaming YES! YES! WE WANT THE TOTAL WAR! YES! YES! WAR!
How sanity is preferable to insanity. Although I am slightly envious of your blissfully empty minds just flowing along with the majority opinion towards the end of history.
You know if you were even a little bit sane, you’d think about how bad this war is for climate change and you’d let Russia have a little Crimea. God forbid a burgeoning empire have a little Ukraine. Like even if the evil caricature of Russia was true, in a utilitarian perspective it would be better to let them take half of Ukraine because of the insane amounts of greenhouse gases this war produces. Less people would be dead too. But you can only think in childish principles and scold anyone who doesn’t want Ukraine fighting to the last man. Surrender was always a shitty option.
Basically it’s better in every way to not support an endless and pointless war.
Russia’s whole economy relies on green house gas production, so much for the climate. It’s really easy to say you should capitulate to a foreign military invasion when you aren’t the one being sacrificed. Russia wanted control of Ukraine, and every place they lost when the USSR collapsed. Making it clear his goals are to annex land from other nations he sees as part of their lost empire. If you don’t believe me Putin keeps saying things like how annexing lost land isn’t invasion, it’s reclamation, then uses the Peter the Great’s similar justification for expanding their empire into Sweden centuries ago, how it’s just reclaiming their god given lands, like on the 350th anniversary of the event, in a speech defending his invasion of Ukraine, which undermines the veracity of how threatened they felt in this situation, or how that was why they invaded Ukraine. He rambles on about it so much he even went on an tangent about it in a meeting with an organization of young Russia entrepreneurs who were still in university. NATO and the EU, also acting in their self interest, wanted Ukraine to favor trade, and defense pacts with them instead. So there has been a proxy war between them, in Ukraine, and guess what? Russia lost. So, unwilling to accept a cold defeat, and going with the concept that they have a god given right to Ukraine, they fired up the military again, and went in for a full invasion this time, with a bunch of BS excuses, like de-nazification, as they sent in a PMC ran by nazis, to accomplish this task.
Neither actor in this is operating for some sort of altruistic reason, Ukrainian oligarchs are pursuing who they think they can use to enrich themselves the most with, and the Ukrainian people are stuck between two forces they are much smaller than, who are fighting over their homeland. You give favor to one empire in this situation (and you acknowledge that is what they are, and what they are doing), the one who has used it’s military to slaughter 150 thousand, or more, innocent people, because you believe it will be the best option for you. You are both acting in self interest on top of the lives lost, because “just giving” Russia Ukraine is just that, sacrificing the lives of those who’s home they are invading, and falling for the falsehood that trying to appease imperialists will make them stop waging wars, taking land, and slaughtering people in the process, thus supporting endless war by giving the empirical power what they want, more empire, thus justifying use of military force, because it results in more empire. You are doing is with the thin veneer of an excuse that is b-b-but the environment, ignoring how, by your own ideas of a utilitarian perspective, that it’s actually best to allow Ukraine to align more with the west, because it was Russia that sent the military killing machine in, while NATO was sticking to routes far, far, less damaging to the environment, and human life.
Russia wanted control of Ukraine, and every place they lost when the USSR collapsed.
So your argument boils down to that the CIA operation to regime change the democratically elected government of Ukraine is a preemptive strike to…
NATO and the EU, also acting in their self interest, wanted Ukraine to favor trade, and defense pacts with them instead.
uh, gain control of Ukraine. And Russia should just concede that they lost.
I mean fine, I think that is what the people who planned this brinkmanship thought too. All is fair in love and war and so on. With “people” I mean Obama and Biden btw.
The problem is this was dangerous warmongering and we KNEW how Russia would most likely react. Even during the Maidan “protests” when senior US politicians visited Ukraine as support there were articles in western newspapers warning of this.
Because the exact same thing happened when the CIA interfered in Georgia with the “Rose Revolution” and talk of EU and NATO led to Russia invading. And yes there is hard evidence for CIA/NED interference in Georgia as well.
So: if you know that action A leads to consequence B, and you do action A anyway, you are accepting the consequence as the price for your actions.
So the moral question becomes - is it justified to start a war in order to bleed the dangerous OrcRussian empire?
If your answer is yes, then that puts the onus of providing hard evidence that the alternative would have been likely to occur and to be worse.
And even then it doesn’t justify fucking shitting on everybody who points out the historical facts and that this war was partially provoked? Why continue demanding unwavering support for the US, NATO and EU imperialism? Why deny reality? Why pretend that the western mainstream media is somehow reporting the objective truth and everything else is “Russian propaganda”?
The answer is that ONLY if you deny all historical evidence can you build consensus to endlessly continue the proxy war and make it sound like diplomacy is impossible.
Anyway, yeah Putin talks a lot of shit, he’s known to do that. He’s a sociopath who rules Russia by means of propaganda. But he hasn’t started any wars except in response to US imperialist aggression (or maybe one, don’t know about the Chechen war). So I don’t think he would actually invade neighbors unprovoked. Ukraine could have stayed neutral and be… well not perfectly fine. But better than it is now.
What Russia did do is pretty much the same as what the US does - interfere through propaganda and other means in the democracy of other countries. This would justify harsh sanctions in my opinion, but does not justify war because moderating social media like facebook and twitter to filter propaganda would not even be that expensive. But that is not something you’d hear from a neoliberal.
It all boils down to this: This war was provoked, the evidence for interference and regime change is indisputable (they admitted it), there are actual nazi sympathizers holding power in Ukraine’s military today. Would Ukraine be better off without a CIA plot and still neutral under Yanukovych’s successor?
BTW this does not excuse Russia’s invasion or make me pro Russia. And neither is this argument invalidated by any war crimes committed since the coup, or excuse these war crimes.
On a personal note I have to say that well at least the EU would be whole fucking lot better off without this imperialist bullshit. Without this insane wealth transfer to the military industrial complex. Without rearmament. Without the left completely turning off their brain and drinking the fucking NATO cool aid.
You give favor to one empire in this situation (and you acknowledge that is what they are, and what they are doing)
I did not, do not misrepresent what I wrote! I called them a burgeoning empire, an itty bitty little cute empireling! (/s in case you missed it again)
But yeah I think objectively Russia is the lesser of two evils by far.
No, that wasn’t my argument. The US and Russia have been having a cold war over trade, and defense, with ex-soviets countries since the soviet union fell. Both have been exercising various amounts of power over Ukiraine against each other. For instancem, Poroshenko was involved in very Trump like corrupt business deals with Russia. He was also playing cards of possibly siding with the EU to get more favorable outcomes from Russia, and vice versa. People in Ukraine had valid reasons to sour on him. I am not saying the CIA didn’t act on this momentum, but you paint the CIA as a total control mechanism of Ukraine, and Ukrainians without, or very greatly reduced, agency over their own actions. This is something the “non-western” imperial apologists have a tendency to do. The CIA is credited with so much they are like some sort of near politically omnipotent entity, and the people in the countries they operate in are little more than easily controlled, witless, puppets. This is not true. Outside of situations where the military was totally willing to be pocketed by the US, the CIA has only the ability to give fuel towards already existing political momentum. Put their hand on the scale, so-to-speak. They also ignore the same proxy war crap Russia does, because it makes their narrative cleaner when they are only pointing to one provocateur. Yanukovich was corrupt, and his position within Ukraine was deeply soured by his own actions. Did the CIA play a hand in euromaiden? Of course they did. However they did not create the backlash to his presidency, nor was euroomaiden something the CIA fabricated whole cloth. In the end Yanukovich was deeply corrupt, had lost most of his favor with the people, and Oligarchs that would better profit from the deal with the EU, that he killed, likely false flagged some protestors, as an icing on the cake measure towards someone already in free-fall. Poroshenko was not assassinated, the military, and other security organs did not oust him, there was no massive public backlash, ala euromaiden. He lost an election to Zelenskyy, who won by a large margin for a national election. Zelenskyy was popular for a number of reasons, he was relatively popular as a comedian, he was charasmatic, and found it easy to defend himself with words, probably aided by his occupation. Also he garnered a LOT of popularity being that he was just some comedian, and Poroshenko was just another corrupt politician in Ukraine. So this was not some situation where Russia was just trying to be Ukraine’s BFF, and giving them the best possible diplomatic outcomes. They had FSB on the ground, they were buying people, they were reaching deeper into Ukrainian trade interests, etc. They lost. Guess what? Neither group is the good guy here. You seem to take my stance that Russia is complete shit, and held back by NATO being a barrier of a, currently, greater imperial power, as me supporting the US/NATO. I see them both the same, just that NATO has a lot more wealth, so they are currently the ones exercising that power most broadly. If Russia could, they would, and Putin, when addressing his own people, even in private events, makes speeches about how that is exactly his intent. Nationalistic fervor is hugely popular in Russia. The point being, Russia is not JUST innocently defending themselves, they are vying for power projection as they can.
This same two way interference went on with Georgia as well. Difference is I don’t turn a blind eye to Russia’s empire expansion, or the “west’s”. They are both knowing players in a political campaign that predates the USSR.
"So your argument boils down to that the CIA operation to regime change the democratically elected government of Ukraine is a preemptive strike to…
NATO and the EU, also acting in their self interest, wanted Ukraine to favor trade, and defense pacts with them instead.
uh, gain control of Ukraine. And Russia should just concede that they lost."
Correct, I have modeled it after your argument of just surrendering Ukraine to Russia. If it’s an acceptable outcome for Russia, it should be acceptable the other way around too. Both are just empires maneuvering for control of spheres of influence, and strategic resources.
“So: if you know that action A leads to consequence B, and you do action A anyway, you are
accepting the consequence as the price for your actions.” - in relationship to seeing expansion of western sphere of influence into Ukraine as something that will trigger war.
This cuts both ways, there has always been two players, at least, vying for Ukraine. Whoever lost the cold war either has to choose to cut their losses, or turn their military power on Ukraine, and invade. There is no morally upright outcome to this. Neither side was going to just give up. Well, at least I believe the US probably would have invaded, in case of loss, but that’s not how it played out, so I may be wrong, but I am pretty certain I am not. I have no doubts it would have been an incredible tragedy for the Ukrainian people either way, and that is what I am concerned with. People who defend non-western empires so often call for nuance, but what they want is for only information painting their opposing camp in the worst light, and apologia when the corruptions, FSB manipulation, etc. of Russia is brought up. Always playing Russia as merely defending its self, and never just suffering the consequences of participating empire building proxy wars. This is the outcome when you are capitalists, you compete for trade, and influence, and you do whatever to achieve your goals. This inevitably leads to wars.
“But yeah I think objectively Russia is the lesser of two evils by far”
As do I, but only because they are the poorer empire, by far. They walk like a duck, and quack like a duck, so they are a duck, and loss of western control of these spheres of influence will only open a vacuum Russia will do everything in it’s power to fill, as long as they are physically able to do so.
And yeah the CIA put their hands on the scale, but they funded and trained the main organizer behind Euromaidan who created a kind of alternative news channel. And the NED had funded 65 projects in Ukraine totaling over $20 million. So sure what the CIA/NED does doesn’t always work out, but controlling about 5% witless puppets is often enough. If you continue to do it at least some of your seeds will bear fruit. Subversion of democracy in another country is a crime in itself. But we just ignore it when the US does it.
You can’t just say “well whatever, both do it, we won, it’s just what we do”. The US and the EU and the liberals are responsible for ignoring it, censoring it, covering for this despicable criminal behavior. And fundamental to morality is that we are responsible for OUR behavior or what we can influence. We can condemn Russia, but it’s outside of our control.
You literally cannot have a free press and a democratic government if a major superpower is spending millions to subvert you. And if some country takes action they are called authoritarian or corrupt by the west.
The point being, Russia is not JUST innocently defending themselves, they are vying for power projection as they can.
Yeah definitely. But that does not mean we should dismiss their legitimate security concerns. Like if China somehow did a regime change in Mexico (put their hand on the scale) the US would immediately react. And then if Mexico were to plan a military alliance with China, the US would invade. This is how superpowers who have actual enemies react. And Ukraine is like 400 miles away from Moscow, that is nothing so Russia does have a legitimate security problem with Nato and the US building bases there.
And THAT problem gets censored or shouted down at least outside of socialist subs. And in real life, it easily can get you fired, like loosing your job. The EU literally passed regulation to ban people from seeing any other viewpoint (even though RT is a legitimate propaganda outlet).
And the problem with this is that any diplomatic solution towards peace CANNOT go forward if all people see is “Russia evil empire attacked Ukraine for no reason”.
And all this leads to an endless proxy war, down to the last Ukrainian.
It’s the Russian/China apologists that are annoying.
This is what I was responding to. Being called apologists and insulted and then they clutch their pearls when they get banned out of communities when they want to spew their lies and insults everywhere. This is what is insane.
You have provided me no new information about what the CIA has done.
You also assume that any diplomatic solution with Putin is not just a temporary measure as, from his own mouth, he is really intent on empire building, and tells organizations like the future entrepreneurs of Russia that they should be building their lives towards these goals. Russia attacked Ukraine for their own interests. He has been preaching that since 2000, and one of his most pushed messages for why the law should be changed to make him president for life is that the restoration of the empire is not a plan that can survive through numerous elections.
So, NATO seeing this, over and over, while some leaders had reservations, they also had legitimate security concerns about Russia adding the Black Sea, and a huge amount of new borderland that connected to the Shenzhen Economic Zone. To add more to the picture: Life long leader from the secret police of the previous empire, and the contemporary Russia, with known power over their most prominent oligarchs, can’t shut-up about expanding their empire, for over a decade. Then, when the re-ratification of the CFE was hinged on Russia pulling it’s illegal military bases from Georgia, and Moldova, something both countries had been making clear they want gone since they were established, Russia completely withdrew. They then started a military build up, and began running advanced forces training in the caucuses, while giving more strength to boarders with Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. Then they had those bases break away from their respective countries, and began defending them from being re-absorbed. Do you not see how the EU/NATO, could have legitimate security issues with Russia, keeping this in mind? Do you just paint the western hegemony the way many in the US just go around saying “dur hur Russia evil”? Because that is what a lot of people on lemmy do. Then demand nuance because the picture is more complicated than that, but only for non-western aligned countries.
This is all capitalist empire building bullshit. There is not one major economic power on Earth not participating in this shit in one form or another. While the west is the empire of establishment, the newer ones growing are committing a lot of the same horrors. The only difference I see, is that that they are restrained from just going on bombing campaigns, like the US, because the old empire is still there, and the consequences of dealing with that, as they are still extremely powerful, regardless of what is being said about the collapse of the west, will be extreme, and dire for everyone. Not just active warring empires, the entire world. As western influence over sphere in places like SEA, eastern Europe, central asia, etc, wain, you will see hostilities from other major economic powers grow in their regions. They are all hyper-nationalistic, and spending time on their social media reveals annexing countries, especially their neighbors, is very popular.
The only thing I’ve ever seen here labelled “extremist” and I’ve never really looked into it, is the claim that the Tiananmen Square Massacre was instigated by the CIA. Agian, I have never looked into it, but that’s the only thing I’ve ever seen ruffle people’s feathers.
I really think we all have a lot in common here, and maybe it’s just boredom, but we shouldn’t be at each other’s throats.
I’m a strong believer in facts (wow can’t believe I have to say that) but if someone compiled a large list of grievances with sources, that would be great. I always see lemmings labeld as “tankies” coming in with troves of links and sources, but never anyone else.
There’s no argument here to defend. But posting a blog from someone in China and calling it a proper source is never going to be correct. They also think that the UN is “western imperialism” and so sources from them will be deleted (even though those sources are from every nation state in the UN).
Not trying to argue just that different people have different standards of what constitutes a proper source. Personally I wouldn’t consider Wikipedia or RadioFreeAsia as proper sources for instance.
They also think that the UN is “western imperialism” and so sources from them will be deleted
I don’t think it’s inherently wrong to point out that much of those with sway within the UN come from within the US sphere of influence (look at the UN intervention on the side of the US in their war of exterminaton against the DPRK for example) and thus treat it as such however with that being said I also haven’t really seen UN sources being deleted before unless the comment containing it breaks rules such as being chauvinist for example (as tends to unfortunately happen).
even though those sources are from every nation state in the UN
Not entirely true, not every paper etc published by the UN is signed off on by every member (hence the back and forth between the un commission and Chinese government on Xinjiang).
Those back and forths happen with every nation in the UN, especially when those nations are trying to avoid blame. It’s like claiming that the US and Israel aren’t committing a genocide because they didn’t sign off on the papers the UN released saying they did. The exact same thing is true of all the sources saying China and Russia are doing the same. And yet if you post those sources, immediate ban and comments removed.
I don’t think you really understood what I’m saying. You claimed every UN source is from every member nation this isn’t true, the UN has many members under the US umbrella this is true. Being skeptical is thus reasonable given these 2 facts.
Also the UN report on Xinjiang explicitly did not call it a genocide but that there were abuses which is true, during the ETIM crackdowns there definitely were abuses genocide however is another story the only “source” for which is a German evangelical on a mission from god to destroy china who speaks neither Uyghur nor mandarin and works for the victims of communism memorial foundation (I really should have to explain why that would cast doubt in this case I hope).
I’ll have to take your word for it. The only side of China I get to see from way over here is when they hold innocent countrymen hostage to put pressure on a third party.
Not being facetious; I recognize that what I get to see is heavily biased.
In regards to the 2 Michael’s who were rightfully arrested for being intelligence operatives with Spavor then successfully suing the Canadian government and Korvig for unknowingly making him an accomplice and winning $6 million. Are not who I would call innocents held hostage.
uh huh so everything surrounding it was just a happy coincidence for China. Even allowing for the sake of discussion (meaning I don’t know if it’s actually true) that China arrested them for criminal acts that they took in China, THAT DOESN’T JUSTIFY WHAT CHINA DID.
Look, I can acknowledge that my grasp of what it is like to live in China is non-existent, but you’re not going to sway anyone spouting party bullshit. China is an active threat to my country’s autonomy and uses threats of violence against our loved ones for political manipulation. Shit like that has to stop if China is to become a benign member of the international community.
It’s not party bullshit it’s reality Spavor sued Korvig and the Canadian government and won $6million for them turning him into an intelligence asset without his knowledge leading to his arrest. Espionage is a capitol offence in China it was Canada holding Meng Wanzhou hostage at the behest of the Americans that spared them. Also I don’t think Canadians (or any other US satellite like the Europeans) get to decide who is “a benign member of the international community” after you helped the Americans rampage across the world committing non stop atrocities for the last 81 years.
China is an active threat to my country’s autonomy and uses threats of violence against our loved ones for political manipulation.
What country couldn’t say the same about the US? Nobody is saying china is a paradise, it’s just objectively not quite as fucked up as the US at the moment.
They’re literally capturing innocent foreign citizens. Ask the Mexican government about all the grievances they filed asking for information on innocent Mexican citizens who died in ICE custody.
Nothing wrong with communists. I feel so radicalized by capitalism I’m almost there anyway.
It’s the Russian/China apologists that are annoying.
Russia is bad, Chia.na is bad, and the U.S. is bad. All those things can be true. But all the insufferable posts about how great China and Russia are, and all the bad things you have heard about them m are just Western propaganda…
If they were serious about their ideology, then why do they care so much about someone thinks about China or Russia.
If they didn’t brigade those issues so much, straight up ban people, just because they disagree, or hlrefuse to have any real discussion that doesn’t center on just shutting other people down, then maybe people outside their group might take them more seriously.
Anarcho communists welcome you. We hate all nation states equally. Unfortunately there aren’t enough of us to brigade anything.
For anyone who wishes to know more Now And After: The ABC of Communist Anarchism was written to explain anarcho-communism in plain, easily understood, language.
It begins by explaining the current capitalist system (now) and then goes on to explain anarchism (after).
It is available to read or download in multiple formats, for free, here: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-berkman-what-is-communist-anarchism#toc2
This isn’t terrible, but it’s important to be aware that the class analysis and definition of capitalism in this is nonsense. The capitalist class is not just “rich people” and the working class is not just “poor people.” Capitalism is not defined by…whatever this attempts to define it by. Capital is the power to prioritize the allocation of resources and labor.
Capitalism stands for the idea that the purpose of all value, surplus and base really, of production is to increase the capital of the holders of capital. That is it. It is the worship of allocative power solely for the sake of allocative power. And that’s why it inevitably degenerates into fascism–the worship of power solely for the sake of power.
All class dynamics must oriented themselves within the structure of that allocative power analysis. The capitalist class is not “rich” people, or at least not definitionally, and the working class is not poor people. The capitalist class are those who derive increase to their allocative power primarily from the direction of capital under the capitalist system. On the flip side, working class is anyone who increases their own allocative power primarily through the application of their own labor. The vague vibes based class analysis in this would effectively place servers (like, at a restaurant) as bourgeoisie capitalist-class/adjacent just like doctors, lawyers, programmers, and the like. I think it’s clear why that maybe feels like complete bullshit to most peeps.
Did you read a different book?..
He’s very much aware of what capitalism is and clearly doesn’t just believe it to be “rich people”. What nonsense.
He literally says the bourgeoisie, namely doctors, lawyers, and the like, are, in their interests, aligned with the capitalist class if not altogether a part of it. And even the parts you quote are hard to parse as they are both focused on the outputs of production rather than the allocative power leading to production but also touch upon the problem of how our overly financialized economies obfuscate the allocative power issue. At the same time, when he says shit like “the business man is entirely at [the big bankers financiers] mercy” it makes me think we are not on the same page here, unless his definition of business man is not the investor class–absolutely capitalist class–business man I use.
It’s almost as if anarcho communism isn’t based upon Marxist definitions…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_communist_ideologies#Anarchist_communism
I can understand hating all nation states, but hating them equally? Couldn’t be me.
there are dozens of us!
I feel like things would get awkward after the revolution.
here’s the neat part: anyone who unironically thinks china or russia are communist is a dumbass and can be ignored or is trolling.
Nobody thinks Russia is even socialist anymore, this is an absurd strawman. Marxist-Leninists believe China to be socialist and run by a communist party, because public ownership is the principal aspect of the PRC’s economy and the working classes control the state.
yes but: “communist party” does not mean “achieved communism.” we all know that. they are working toward a goal, a goal I agree with, but we all know they are still caps. for the time being.
i would not refer to china as communist.
Between capitalism and communism lies the transition between the two, called socialism. China is socialist, as public ownership is the principal aspect of the economy, and the working classes control the state. In capitalism, private ownership is principal and capitalists control the state.
China and russia being communist is an American right wing talking point.
No leftists consider the russian federation communist, and not even the cpc considers china communist. They claim to be attempting to realise communism by first developing socialism to the point that they can.
Whether you believe them or not aside, you’re sort of showing your ignorance. Even the scary tankies on hexbear and ml or whatever don’t think they’re communist. That’s why the term actually existing socialism (aes) is aes and not aec.
i made no indication i believed them or them to be communist. i was speaking of how trollish those who claim china/russia is communist are. they’re almost always “libertarians” or some form of boomer.
tl;dr of my response: China ain’t Socialist, and shouldn’t be emulated in our struggle for socialist revolution worldwide.
Many leftists don’t consider China and the CPC to even be socialist, many socialists around the world see the CPC as a ruling class of another capitalist country, albeit with much higher rates of nationalised industries.
We think you can’t really call yourself socialist when the workers don’t have meaningful democratic control over society. And unless you’re being dishonest or are just misinformed, the workers most certainly don’t have control of society in China. Less so then here (Australia), even.
One only need to talk to people in China to realise this, most people I’ve spoken to in China, even though who support the government, describe a very hierarchical benevolent government.
One simply can’t look a lefty in the eye and say China is socialist, unless those “Chinese Characteristics” suffixed to “Socialism” simply stand for “without democracy”.
There is no meaningful method to agitate for political change (no, being in one of the other parties most certainly doesn’t count), there are no workers unions (strikes are heavily repressed and the only union that exists is controlled by the CPC, though despite that some groups of workers still sometimes bravely strike 💪) no freedom of political association, no democracy in the workplace.
It’s really hard to claim China is socialist, yet people outside of China still do, just because they’re holding the banner of socialism…
I don’t hate China, it’s a pretty nice place, with lovely people, and certainly a nicer place than the shithole of the US. I’ve been to China multiple times, and you wouldn’t catch me dead in the US.
But they just ain’t Socialist, and shouldn’t be emulated in our struggle for revolution worldwide.
Public ownership is the principal aspect of China’s economy, and the working classes control the state. There’s hierarchy, sure, but socialism is not against hierarchy in all cases. Socialism is simply a transitional mode of production between capitalism and communism where the working classes are in charge, and that’s true of China.
你一开口就是“我们为全世界社会主义革命而进行的斗争”。好大的口气！一个连本国工人运动都组织不起来、连一个基层支部都建不起来的澳大利亚键盘政治家，倒有资格给全世界的革命道路制定标准，还能对十四亿人的实践经验盖棺定论了？更荒唐的是，你居然单方面把中国以及所有支持中国社会主义道路的力量都开除出了“我们的斗争”。这个“我们”到底是谁？是那些在历史上真正夺取过政权、真正搞过建设、真正让工人阶级掌握权力的严肃共产党，还是你和网上几个互相吹捧的熟人？现实世界里，凡是取得过任何实质性成就的共产党，几乎都承认中国的社会主义性质，并且认真研究中国经验。你所谓的“许多左翼”，拆开来看，无非就是托洛茨基主义者、极左宗派主义者和“无政府主义者”。其中绝大多数是白人、西方、尤其是北美的知识分子，一辈子连一次成功罢工都没组织过，选举没赢过，合作社也没建成过，却没完没了地“批判”别人几代人用鲜血和汗水走出来的道路。这种“批判”说到底不过是嫉妒，是无能者面对实践者时的一种精神胜利法。
你把中国共产党称作一个“统治阶级”。凡是受过一点基本政治经济学训练的人，都能看出来你连《资本论》第一卷都没有真正读懂。什么叫阶级？阶级不是幼儿园水平的“谁坐在上面、谁待在下面”。阶级是由其在生产关系中的地位决定的；核心标准，是对生产资料的所有权，以及由此产生的、私人地无偿占有他人劳动所创造剩余价值的能力。在中国，土地实行全民所有和集体所有；金融、能源、通信、交通等关系国民经济命脉的重要部门掌握在公有制经济手中；国有资本所产生的收益归全民所有，并通过财政体系重新用于教育、医疗、基础设施建设和大规模扶贫等公共事业。你把“国有化比例很高的资本主义国家”和“社会主义”混为一谈，恰恰说明你根本分不清形式上的国家资本主义与事实上处于无产阶级专政条件下的公有制经济。你连最基本的经济概念都没弄明白。
接着，你又“简单地”宣布中国工人对社会没有民主控制。注意，你没有提供任何证据，没有调查，没有数据，只有一句轻飘飘的“就是如此”和一个“毫无疑问”。那事实是什么？哈佛大学阿什民主治理与创新中心连续多年的调查显示，中国公众对中央政府的满意度长期维持在90%以上。爱德曼信任度调查中，中国公众对政府的信任度也多年位居世界前列。这些可不是什么中国官方宣传数据，而是第三方机构、甚至是西方机构做出的调查。你一句“工人没有控制权”就想把这些全部抹掉，可你所谓“民主控制”的标准到底是什么？是不是非得长得像威斯敏斯特议会那样，才配叫民主？
你大概不知道，在中国，县级和乡镇级人民代表大会代表实行直接选举，选民登记率超过90%。你大概也不知道，中国存在一整套自下而上的意见表达、反馈和纠错机制：从村委会、居委会到街道办事处，从地方党委信访部门到12345政务服务便民热线，从人民网“领导留言板”到各级纪检监察举报平台。你大概还不知道，在“十四五”规划编制过程中，中央通过网络向社会征集了数以百万计的意见建议，其中相当一部分被直接吸收到相关文件中。你不知道这些，不是因为它们不存在，而是因为你从来懒得认真了解一个你早已决定鄙视的国家。
你说你“和中国人聊过”，然后得出结论，说中国实行的是一种“善意的等级制政府”。行啊，那我也可以跑到澳大利亚一家酒吧里，找几个喝醉了的矿工聊聊天，然后宣布澳大利亚其实是“封建君主制”。拿几次私人谈话代替社会调查，拿游客式的印象代替阶级分析，这就是你的方法。
说到“等级”，你好像还觉得自己发现了一个多么高明的论据：中国存在层级，因此中国不是社会主义。稍微读过点书的无政府主义者恐怕都不敢把逻辑讲得这么粗糙。巴枯宁过去一百五十年以后，就连当代无政府主义理论都不得不把“废除一切等级”修改成“废除不合理的等级关系”，因为他们自己也承认，只要协作规模超过几十个人，就必然需要协调机制、劳动分工以及某种形式的指挥体系。社会主义要消灭的是剥削性的阶级等级，是资本对劳动的支配，而不是消灭一切组织形式、一切管理结构和一切必要的集中。把“存在层级结构”等同于“不是社会主义”，这已经不只是把孩子连洗澡水一起倒掉了，你倒掉的那个“孩子”本身都是你自己想象出来的稻草人。
然后你又说，中国“缺乏能够实现有意义政治改变的途径”。又是“直接下结论”，又是毫无证据。你似乎不知道党内有民主生活会，有批评与自我批评的传统，有纪律检查和监察制度；不知道中国人民政治协商会议是一个涵盖各民主党派、人民团体、各民族和各界人士的协商平台；不知道还有立法听证、基层协商民主以及“枫桥经验”式的矛盾纠纷化解机制。你说“加入其他政党不算”，可以，那你知不知道中国的八个民主党派不是反对党，而是参政党，直接参与国家大政方针的协商讨论，而且其成员在各级政府、人民代表大会和人民政协中都担任实职？你要么根本不知道，要么明明知道，只是因为这些事实不符合你预设的模板，所以就宣布它们“不算”。
你还谈到工会，说中国没有工会，说“唯一的工会被中共控制”。拥有三亿多会员、世界上规模最大的工会组织（中华全国总工会）到了你嘴里居然就等于“不存在”。你的理由是，它和社会主义国家“纠缠在一起”。可是同志，在无产阶级专政条件下，工会同国家之间本来就不是敌对关系。在资本主义社会里，工会的重要意义在于同资本以及资产阶级国家进行斗争；而在社会主义社会里，国家本身就是工人阶级的国家，工会的任务是组织工人参与管理、维护劳动权益、促进生产发展、教育工人阶级，它的基本方向自然同社会主义国家是一致的。拿衡量资本主义国家工会的同一套“独立性”标准去衡量社会主义国家的工会，就跟按照鱼的标准去判断鸟会不会飞一样荒谬。
你又提到对罢工的“严厉镇压”，却故意无视中国《劳动法》《劳动合同法》《工会法》对劳动者权益的明确保护，无视劳动仲裁制度，也无视近年来大量工人通过法律渠道和集体协商成功维权的案例。你只是选择性地盯住那一小部分符合你预设结论的材料，然后假装除此之外什么都不存在。
最后，你说：“只有中国以外的人才会说中国是社会主义。”中国共产党拥有一亿多名党员，再加上共青团、工会、妇联等组织的覆盖，这个国家有数以亿计的人直接参与社会主义制度的组织和运转。你随便去问一个生活、工作在中国工厂、农村、社区或者学校里的人，问他知不知道自己生活在社会主义制度之下；难道还非得由你来告诉他：“其实你们不是社会主义”？
一个澳大利亚人拿旅游签证来过几次中国，跟几个人喝过几次茶，回去以后就宣布十四亿人都误解了自己社会的性质。这种傲慢，说到底不过是殖民心态的左翼变种：我比你更懂你的国家，我比你更有资格定义你应该走什么道路，你们自己的实践都不算数，只有我的标准才算数。
I think that’s a bit reductive. While I am a sceptic that they’ll ever really succeed and think they’ve fucked themselves a bit with how much power Chinese tech companies have been allowed to amass, there are true believers among the party and the central committee. I mean they teach Marxism in school (sort of).
In general chinese people describe extremely high satisfaction with their government, and respond more positively to questions like “If I have an issue I can go to my local politician and resolve it”[1] than Westminster derived systems (which I would also not dignify with the word democracy) and it is worth asking why this holds while most so called democracies have hostile and parasitic governments.
If the will of the people is enacted then this is a sort of democracy, while if you vote and then the people you elect serve elites and ignore you this isn’t really democratic.
Structurally some things in China are working vastly better than elsewhere, and it’s worth trying to understand /why/ their government seems to work for the people so much more than other systems.
But I was merely relaying what they claim about themselves to point out even people fully committed to toeing their party line would not call them communist.
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/07/long-term-survey-reveals-chinese-government-satisfaction/ ↩︎
Hexbear and .ml are really this weird, yeah. They don’t even pretend to be socialist yet they just insist it’s AES.
I’m fine with someone having a negative opinion of China so long as they don’t use that as a purity test and demand everyone else denounce China, calling people “fascists” or “tankies” and refusing to work with them otherwise.
Obviously, the vast majority of people on here don’t live in China, and we generally have bigger fish to fry domestically to worry about meddling in their affairs. I would turn the question around and ask why people are so invested in making sure everyone sufficiently condemns China instead of working together to address the more pressing matter of class conflict.
This is exactly how I feel about a lot of anti-China spaces. It’s difficult to have a real discussion about almost any topic related to China because if you suggest that anything about them isn’t the worst thing ever you get accused of being a fascist and dismissed, if not banned. If .ml goes too far in the other direction, then it is at least somewhat unique in doing so, and it’s worthwhile to have a space where non-mainstream perspectives can be discussed.
Some of us are just tired of western people not wanting to get a little nuance about none western countries. And the instance you admit that ofcourse no place is perfect you get hit with. “See x is bad, communism can’t work in reality.” It is tiresome and eventually I end up defaulting to standard answers or blocking people if they are rude.
On top of that I do think it is amazing how for instance India, China and Vietnam has improved the lives of billions, but every single time it hit western news it is followed by “but at what price”.
And finally I have realized that things are not always as they seem and the propaganda machine makes it hard to discern the reality of many things. This goes for everything. I have no clue if it actually is dangerous to go USA or it just seem that way.
The US is indeed very dangerous. If the police don’t harass you out of boredom, the drugged up homeless man will chase you down the street screaming.
Literally happened to me a few days ago, fucking hate it here.
USian here. It’s not dangerous as long as you’re not even vaguely latino.
It kinda is though. You have to worry about scammers/pickpockets/hustlers/gangs in a couple or spots (although they mostly stick to murdering each other).
Plus basal violence is extremely high. Like even by intentional homicides it’s in the top third https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
There’s a lot of the world without a “bad part of town”
Pickpocketing is not a thing in America. Too subtle. We are a mugging people. However, I will say that your chances of encountering gang violence as a tourist/traveler are quite low. The main danger when visiting here is the government/police.
I want to say “how much of that is gang violence” but I don’t want to take one in the neck.
It’s a lot of you count ICE as a gang.
Based on this thread I think I will stay my horses. No fun in that kind worry for what would have been a once in a life time experience.
Also I find it interesting I get 7 downvotes for answering OP in good faith. Lemmy is not Reddit and I am happy for it, but there are a lot of trenches here
I haven’t seen any posts about how great Russia is
Well then what’s your opinion on Russia and the Soviet Union?
The Soviet Union collapsed because it essentially was an end game capitalistic system. With very few owners, one could argue one owner. It’s the aspiring goal of unchecked capitalism.
Russia then replaced it, with an umbrella of oligarchs and most Western countries. Most notably the US. Has copied a similar system, it’s rotten to the core.
We’re not going to see an improvement of our current system, before an elite class in one society is removed. Personally I think the US, UK or China will see the first uprising.
We need to either tax capital higher than base yields or tax death/inheritance to a degree generational wealth can’t occur.
Everything points to capitalism being the best system we know of, but we need to counter the problems that arises from it.
Just like checking but what economic system drove the worst era of colonialism and slavery ever seen, the worst wars and arms proliferation in human history, ecocide on a big-rocks-from-space scale, pollution emissions on a earth-is-volcanoes-now scale, the worst industrial accidents ever, the worst deliberate adulteration of goods ever, and has required constant warfare to sustain it?
Just curious.
I see countless posts about how Russia is the brave defender against American imperialism and their invasion of Ukraine is a good thing to support.
Citation needed
> opens account
No no they don’t do that but will do it the moment you say Russia isn’t socialist at all.
They’re very smart like that. They say don’t do that as they do it.
Russia isn’t socialist at all
Those people are called tankies
I once got at least 10 comments telling me how good russia and china are and how bad USA is and that i am a USA sucker, welp kinda my fault for making a comment in the wrong instance
I’m sure you’ve had this explained before, how a unipolar world is worse than a detente.
In the same way an oligarchy is preferable to an absolute monopoly, sure
Yeah sure. And the way in how peace is preferable to endless imperialist proxy wars.
And the way how reality is preferable to fantasy. How woke is preferable to asleep. Like acknowledging that the CIA funded the coup by far right elements in Ukraine. Like they did plenty of times before all over the word! But facts are only selected among alternative facts if they serve politics in this post truth world. Nothing can be true that could lead to diplomacy and acknowledging “this is partially our fault”.
Because if we acknowledged the historical facts and that Russia just might genuinely feel threatened by NATO we could move forward with diplomacy to end this war.
All I see when I look at “leftists” today is the image of nazis endlessly screaming YES! YES! WE WANT THE TOTAL WAR! YES! YES! WAR!
How sanity is preferable to insanity. Although I am slightly envious of your blissfully empty minds just flowing along with the majority opinion towards the end of history.
You know if you were even a little bit sane, you’d think about how bad this war is for climate change and you’d let Russia have a little Crimea. God forbid a burgeoning empire have a little Ukraine. Like even if the evil caricature of Russia was true, in a utilitarian perspective it would be better to let them take half of Ukraine because of the insane amounts of greenhouse gases this war produces. Less people would be dead too. But you can only think in childish principles and scold anyone who doesn’t want Ukraine fighting to the last man. Surrender was always a shitty option.
Basically it’s better in every way to not support an endless and pointless war.
Anyway, lets agree to disagree.
Russia’s whole economy relies on green house gas production, so much for the climate. It’s really easy to say you should capitulate to a foreign military invasion when you aren’t the one being sacrificed. Russia wanted control of Ukraine, and every place they lost when the USSR collapsed. Making it clear his goals are to annex land from other nations he sees as part of their lost empire. If you don’t believe me Putin keeps saying things like how annexing lost land isn’t invasion, it’s reclamation, then uses the Peter the Great’s similar justification for expanding their empire into Sweden centuries ago, how it’s just reclaiming their god given lands, like on the 350th anniversary of the event, in a speech defending his invasion of Ukraine, which undermines the veracity of how threatened they felt in this situation, or how that was why they invaded Ukraine. He rambles on about it so much he even went on an tangent about it in a meeting with an organization of young Russia entrepreneurs who were still in university. NATO and the EU, also acting in their self interest, wanted Ukraine to favor trade, and defense pacts with them instead. So there has been a proxy war between them, in Ukraine, and guess what? Russia lost. So, unwilling to accept a cold defeat, and going with the concept that they have a god given right to Ukraine, they fired up the military again, and went in for a full invasion this time, with a bunch of BS excuses, like de-nazification, as they sent in a PMC ran by nazis, to accomplish this task.
Neither actor in this is operating for some sort of altruistic reason, Ukrainian oligarchs are pursuing who they think they can use to enrich themselves the most with, and the Ukrainian people are stuck between two forces they are much smaller than, who are fighting over their homeland. You give favor to one empire in this situation (and you acknowledge that is what they are, and what they are doing), the one who has used it’s military to slaughter 150 thousand, or more, innocent people, because you believe it will be the best option for you. You are both acting in self interest on top of the lives lost, because “just giving” Russia Ukraine is just that, sacrificing the lives of those who’s home they are invading, and falling for the falsehood that trying to appease imperialists will make them stop waging wars, taking land, and slaughtering people in the process, thus supporting endless war by giving the empirical power what they want, more empire, thus justifying use of military force, because it results in more empire. You are doing is with the thin veneer of an excuse that is b-b-but the environment, ignoring how, by your own ideas of a utilitarian perspective, that it’s actually best to allow Ukraine to align more with the west, because it was Russia that sent the military killing machine in, while NATO was sticking to routes far, far, less damaging to the environment, and human life.
And you call me insane?
So your argument boils down to that the CIA operation to regime change the democratically elected government of Ukraine is a preemptive strike to…
uh, gain control of Ukraine. And Russia should just concede that they lost.
I mean fine, I think that is what the people who planned this brinkmanship thought too. All is fair in love and war and so on. With “people” I mean Obama and Biden btw.
The problem is this was dangerous warmongering and we KNEW how Russia would most likely react. Even during the Maidan “protests” when senior US politicians visited Ukraine as support there were articles in western newspapers warning of this.
Because the exact same thing happened when the CIA interfered in Georgia with the “Rose Revolution” and talk of EU and NATO led to Russia invading. And yes there is hard evidence for CIA/NED interference in Georgia as well.
So: if you know that action A leads to consequence B, and you do action A anyway, you are accepting the consequence as the price for your actions.
So the moral question becomes - is it justified to start a war in order to bleed the dangerous
OrcRussian empire?If your answer is yes, then that puts the onus of providing hard evidence that the alternative would have been likely to occur and to be worse.
And even then it doesn’t justify fucking shitting on everybody who points out the historical facts and that this war was partially provoked? Why continue demanding unwavering support for the US, NATO and EU imperialism? Why deny reality? Why pretend that the western mainstream media is somehow reporting the objective truth and everything else is “Russian propaganda”?
The answer is that ONLY if you deny all historical evidence can you build consensus to endlessly continue the proxy war and make it sound like diplomacy is impossible.
Anyway, yeah Putin talks a lot of shit, he’s known to do that. He’s a sociopath who rules Russia by means of propaganda. But he hasn’t started any wars except in response to US imperialist aggression (or maybe one, don’t know about the Chechen war). So I don’t think he would actually invade neighbors unprovoked. Ukraine could have stayed neutral and be… well not perfectly fine. But better than it is now.
What Russia did do is pretty much the same as what the US does - interfere through propaganda and other means in the democracy of other countries. This would justify harsh sanctions in my opinion, but does not justify war because moderating social media like facebook and twitter to filter propaganda would not even be that expensive. But that is not something you’d hear from a neoliberal.
It all boils down to this: This war was provoked, the evidence for interference and regime change is indisputable (they admitted it), there are actual nazi sympathizers holding power in Ukraine’s military today. Would Ukraine be better off without a CIA plot and still neutral under Yanukovych’s successor?
BTW this does not excuse Russia’s invasion or make me pro Russia. And neither is this argument invalidated by any war crimes committed since the coup, or excuse these war crimes.
On a personal note I have to say that well at least the EU would be whole fucking lot better off without this imperialist bullshit. Without this insane wealth transfer to the military industrial complex. Without rearmament. Without the left completely turning off their brain and drinking the fucking NATO cool aid.
I did not, do not misrepresent what I wrote! I called them a burgeoning empire, an itty bitty little cute empireling! (/s in case you missed it again)
But yeah I think objectively Russia is the lesser of two evils by far.
No, that wasn’t my argument. The US and Russia have been having a cold war over trade, and defense, with ex-soviets countries since the soviet union fell. Both have been exercising various amounts of power over Ukiraine against each other. For instancem, Poroshenko was involved in very Trump like corrupt business deals with Russia. He was also playing cards of possibly siding with the EU to get more favorable outcomes from Russia, and vice versa. People in Ukraine had valid reasons to sour on him. I am not saying the CIA didn’t act on this momentum, but you paint the CIA as a total control mechanism of Ukraine, and Ukrainians without, or very greatly reduced, agency over their own actions. This is something the “non-western” imperial apologists have a tendency to do. The CIA is credited with so much they are like some sort of near politically omnipotent entity, and the people in the countries they operate in are little more than easily controlled, witless, puppets. This is not true. Outside of situations where the military was totally willing to be pocketed by the US, the CIA has only the ability to give fuel towards already existing political momentum. Put their hand on the scale, so-to-speak. They also ignore the same proxy war crap Russia does, because it makes their narrative cleaner when they are only pointing to one provocateur. Yanukovich was corrupt, and his position within Ukraine was deeply soured by his own actions. Did the CIA play a hand in euromaiden? Of course they did. However they did not create the backlash to his presidency, nor was euroomaiden something the CIA fabricated whole cloth. In the end Yanukovich was deeply corrupt, had lost most of his favor with the people, and Oligarchs that would better profit from the deal with the EU, that he killed, likely false flagged some protestors, as an icing on the cake measure towards someone already in free-fall. Poroshenko was not assassinated, the military, and other security organs did not oust him, there was no massive public backlash, ala euromaiden. He lost an election to Zelenskyy, who won by a large margin for a national election. Zelenskyy was popular for a number of reasons, he was relatively popular as a comedian, he was charasmatic, and found it easy to defend himself with words, probably aided by his occupation. Also he garnered a LOT of popularity being that he was just some comedian, and Poroshenko was just another corrupt politician in Ukraine. So this was not some situation where Russia was just trying to be Ukraine’s BFF, and giving them the best possible diplomatic outcomes. They had FSB on the ground, they were buying people, they were reaching deeper into Ukrainian trade interests, etc. They lost. Guess what? Neither group is the good guy here. You seem to take my stance that Russia is complete shit, and held back by NATO being a barrier of a, currently, greater imperial power, as me supporting the US/NATO. I see them both the same, just that NATO has a lot more wealth, so they are currently the ones exercising that power most broadly. If Russia could, they would, and Putin, when addressing his own people, even in private events, makes speeches about how that is exactly his intent. Nationalistic fervor is hugely popular in Russia. The point being, Russia is not JUST innocently defending themselves, they are vying for power projection as they can.
This same two way interference went on with Georgia as well. Difference is I don’t turn a blind eye to Russia’s empire expansion, or the “west’s”. They are both knowing players in a political campaign that predates the USSR.
"So your argument boils down to that the CIA operation to regime change the democratically elected government of Ukraine is a preemptive strike to…
uh, gain control of Ukraine. And Russia should just concede that they lost."
Correct, I have modeled it after your argument of just surrendering Ukraine to Russia. If it’s an acceptable outcome for Russia, it should be acceptable the other way around too. Both are just empires maneuvering for control of spheres of influence, and strategic resources.
“So: if you know that action A leads to consequence B, and you do action A anyway, you are accepting the consequence as the price for your actions.” - in relationship to seeing expansion of western sphere of influence into Ukraine as something that will trigger war.
This cuts both ways, there has always been two players, at least, vying for Ukraine. Whoever lost the cold war either has to choose to cut their losses, or turn their military power on Ukraine, and invade. There is no morally upright outcome to this. Neither side was going to just give up. Well, at least I believe the US probably would have invaded, in case of loss, but that’s not how it played out, so I may be wrong, but I am pretty certain I am not. I have no doubts it would have been an incredible tragedy for the Ukrainian people either way, and that is what I am concerned with. People who defend non-western empires so often call for nuance, but what they want is for only information painting their opposing camp in the worst light, and apologia when the corruptions, FSB manipulation, etc. of Russia is brought up. Always playing Russia as merely defending its self, and never just suffering the consequences of participating empire building proxy wars. This is the outcome when you are capitalists, you compete for trade, and influence, and you do whatever to achieve your goals. This inevitably leads to wars.
“But yeah I think objectively Russia is the lesser of two evils by far”
As do I, but only because they are the poorer empire, by far. They walk like a duck, and quack like a duck, so they are a duck, and loss of western control of these spheres of influence will only open a vacuum Russia will do everything in it’s power to fill, as long as they are physically able to do so.
Well great we agree on the basic facts then.
And yeah the CIA put their hands on the scale, but they funded and trained the main organizer behind Euromaidan who created a kind of alternative news channel. And the NED had funded 65 projects in Ukraine totaling over $20 million. So sure what the CIA/NED does doesn’t always work out, but controlling about 5% witless puppets is often enough. If you continue to do it at least some of your seeds will bear fruit. Subversion of democracy in another country is a crime in itself. But we just ignore it when the US does it.
You can’t just say “well whatever, both do it, we won, it’s just what we do”. The US and the EU and the liberals are responsible for ignoring it, censoring it, covering for this despicable criminal behavior. And fundamental to morality is that we are responsible for OUR behavior or what we can influence. We can condemn Russia, but it’s outside of our control.
You literally cannot have a free press and a democratic government if a major superpower is spending millions to subvert you. And if some country takes action they are called authoritarian or corrupt by the west.
Yeah definitely. But that does not mean we should dismiss their legitimate security concerns. Like if China somehow did a regime change in Mexico (put their hand on the scale) the US would immediately react. And then if Mexico were to plan a military alliance with China, the US would invade. This is how superpowers who have actual enemies react. And Ukraine is like 400 miles away from Moscow, that is nothing so Russia does have a legitimate security problem with Nato and the US building bases there.
And THAT problem gets censored or shouted down at least outside of socialist subs. And in real life, it easily can get you fired, like loosing your job. The EU literally passed regulation to ban people from seeing any other viewpoint (even though RT is a legitimate propaganda outlet).
And the problem with this is that any diplomatic solution towards peace CANNOT go forward if all people see is “Russia evil empire attacked Ukraine for no reason”.
And all this leads to an endless proxy war, down to the last Ukrainian.
This is what I was responding to. Being called apologists and insulted and then they clutch their pearls when they get banned out of communities when they want to spew their lies and insults everywhere. This is what is insane.
You have provided me no new information about what the CIA has done.
You also assume that any diplomatic solution with Putin is not just a temporary measure as, from his own mouth, he is really intent on empire building, and tells organizations like the future entrepreneurs of Russia that they should be building their lives towards these goals. Russia attacked Ukraine for their own interests. He has been preaching that since 2000, and one of his most pushed messages for why the law should be changed to make him president for life is that the restoration of the empire is not a plan that can survive through numerous elections.
So, NATO seeing this, over and over, while some leaders had reservations, they also had legitimate security concerns about Russia adding the Black Sea, and a huge amount of new borderland that connected to the Shenzhen Economic Zone. To add more to the picture: Life long leader from the secret police of the previous empire, and the contemporary Russia, with known power over their most prominent oligarchs, can’t shut-up about expanding their empire, for over a decade. Then, when the re-ratification of the CFE was hinged on Russia pulling it’s illegal military bases from Georgia, and Moldova, something both countries had been making clear they want gone since they were established, Russia completely withdrew. They then started a military build up, and began running advanced forces training in the caucuses, while giving more strength to boarders with Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine. Then they had those bases break away from their respective countries, and began defending them from being re-absorbed. Do you not see how the EU/NATO, could have legitimate security issues with Russia, keeping this in mind? Do you just paint the western hegemony the way many in the US just go around saying “dur hur Russia evil”? Because that is what a lot of people on lemmy do. Then demand nuance because the picture is more complicated than that, but only for non-western aligned countries.
This is all capitalist empire building bullshit. There is not one major economic power on Earth not participating in this shit in one form or another. While the west is the empire of establishment, the newer ones growing are committing a lot of the same horrors. The only difference I see, is that that they are restrained from just going on bombing campaigns, like the US, because the old empire is still there, and the consequences of dealing with that, as they are still extremely powerful, regardless of what is being said about the collapse of the west, will be extreme, and dire for everyone. Not just active warring empires, the entire world. As western influence over sphere in places like SEA, eastern Europe, central asia, etc, wain, you will see hostilities from other major economic powers grow in their regions. They are all hyper-nationalistic, and spending time on their social media reveals annexing countries, especially their neighbors, is very popular.
The only thing I’ve ever seen here labelled “extremist” and I’ve never really looked into it, is the claim that the Tiananmen Square Massacre was instigated by the CIA. Agian, I have never looked into it, but that’s the only thing I’ve ever seen ruffle people’s feathers.
I really think we all have a lot in common here, and maybe it’s just boredom, but we shouldn’t be at each other’s throats.
I’m a strong believer in facts (wow can’t believe I have to say that) but if someone compiled a large list of grievances with sources, that would be great. I always see lemmings labeld as “tankies” coming in with troves of links and sources, but never anyone else.
Anyone that comes in with proper sources is immediately banned and their comments removed, that’s why you never see them.
Such as?
There’s no argument here to defend. But posting a blog from someone in China and calling it a proper source is never going to be correct. They also think that the UN is “western imperialism” and so sources from them will be deleted (even though those sources are from every nation state in the UN).
Not trying to argue just that different people have different standards of what constitutes a proper source. Personally I wouldn’t consider Wikipedia or RadioFreeAsia as proper sources for instance.
I don’t think it’s inherently wrong to point out that much of those with sway within the UN come from within the US sphere of influence (look at the UN intervention on the side of the US in their war of exterminaton against the DPRK for example) and thus treat it as such however with that being said I also haven’t really seen UN sources being deleted before unless the comment containing it breaks rules such as being chauvinist for example (as tends to unfortunately happen).
Not entirely true, not every paper etc published by the UN is signed off on by every member (hence the back and forth between the un commission and Chinese government on Xinjiang).
Those back and forths happen with every nation in the UN, especially when those nations are trying to avoid blame. It’s like claiming that the US and Israel aren’t committing a genocide because they didn’t sign off on the papers the UN released saying they did. The exact same thing is true of all the sources saying China and Russia are doing the same. And yet if you post those sources, immediate ban and comments removed.
I don’t think you really understood what I’m saying. You claimed every UN source is from every member nation this isn’t true, the UN has many members under the US umbrella this is true. Being skeptical is thus reasonable given these 2 facts.
Also the UN report on Xinjiang explicitly did not call it a genocide but that there were abuses which is true, during the ETIM crackdowns there definitely were abuses genocide however is another story the only “source” for which is a German evangelical on a mission from god to destroy china who speaks neither Uyghur nor mandarin and works for the victims of communism memorial foundation (I really should have to explain why that would cast doubt in this case I hope).
Im not communist but China is not that bad, people have a lot more freedom in China than in the US.
Is it really freedom if you can’t stand outside a school with a battle rifle?
I’ll have to take your word for it. The only side of China I get to see from way over here is when they hold innocent countrymen hostage to put pressure on a third party.
Not being facetious; I recognize that what I get to see is heavily biased.
In regards to the 2 Michael’s who were rightfully arrested for being intelligence operatives with Spavor then successfully suing the Canadian government and Korvig for unknowingly making him an accomplice and winning $6 million. Are not who I would call innocents held hostage.
uh huh so everything surrounding it was just a happy coincidence for China. Even allowing for the sake of discussion (meaning I don’t know if it’s actually true) that China arrested them for criminal acts that they took in China, THAT DOESN’T JUSTIFY WHAT CHINA DID.
Look, I can acknowledge that my grasp of what it is like to live in China is non-existent, but you’re not going to sway anyone spouting party bullshit. China is an active threat to my country’s autonomy and uses threats of violence against our loved ones for political manipulation. Shit like that has to stop if China is to become a benign member of the international community.
It’s not party bullshit it’s reality Spavor sued Korvig and the Canadian government and won $6million for them turning him into an intelligence asset without his knowledge leading to his arrest. Espionage is a capitol offence in China it was Canada holding Meng Wanzhou hostage at the behest of the Americans that spared them. Also I don’t think Canadians (or any other US satellite like the Europeans) get to decide who is “a benign member of the international community” after you helped the Americans rampage across the world committing non stop atrocities for the last 81 years.
What country couldn’t say the same about the US? Nobody is saying china is a paradise, it’s just objectively not quite as fucked up as the US at the moment.
Did you miss the part a few comments up about Russia, China and the US all being shit cunts?
Yes, i dont see any of that in this thread
That shit happens in the US daily with ICE so yeah it’s worse over here.
What does that have to do with China/Canada relations? How is ICE putting pressure on foreign governments? This is fucking weird thing to say.
They’re literally capturing innocent foreign citizens. Ask the Mexican government about all the grievances they filed asking for information on innocent Mexican citizens who died in ICE custody.