#521

toyotathon posted:

toyotathon posted:

cars posted:

Tetris, by The Soviet Union.


#522

shriekingviolet posted:

cars is doing his best to return us to the pristine state of primordial nothingness. almost there!!


Got in just in time for the Big Crunch

#523
Instead of locking the thread he just decided to shut the site down for a week. Good move on his part imo
#524
Double post so I'm just going to say this: socialism is the context in which the problems of class society can be solved, not the solution of those problems. I think that, despite the criticisms and problems I have with the CCP, it would be fair given what I just said to call China socialist.

There. Now Xi has my approval...communism can now flourish across the "Middle Kingdom," as China was once known.

Edited by Parenti ()

#525

filler posted:

I might have broken this thing wide open


guys i think that image is edited

Zoe posted:

you don't really have to ask if chinese socialism has worked for them, but if you do their response will be a resounding "yes." which, ok, maybe that's the success of a cynical campaign to maintain the allegiance of the peasant base which won the revolution. but if you're viewing things that way you're no better than the china-watcher types who claim the government is minimizing unemployment for the sake of "social stability" rather than keeping people employed. sometimes things are as simple as they seem.



This touches on the classic propagandizing we saw with the Soviets, Parenti has a really good paragraph on it from Blackshirts & Reds.

"During the Cold War, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum."



I met Michael Parenti recently and didn't even ask him what he thought about China...what the fuck.

#526
Ooo how’d that go
#527

dimashq posted:

Ooo how’d that go


#528
So what is tHE rHizzonE's opinion about the Houston Rockets and Blizzard affairs because it seems like a bunch of bourgeois nonsense to me. I dunno a whole bunch though. But the line I'm hearing is people needing to stand up to the CPC and support the Hong Konger protests because U.S. corporations are too eager to kowtow to China. But what if the NBA wants to tone down its statements to China? Narcissistic political leaders are making that impossible, exposing free speech in America as nothing but a sham.
#529
The gamers are rising up again
#530
American gamers are being bullied to be politically correct by political and opinion elites. This is what happens when gaming enters a political minefield. The more the U.S. forces Blizzard to be politically correct, the narrower Blizzard's path will be, because Chinese gamers and the public do not mind gaming decoupling and will not buy U.S. political correctness.
#531
i fucking hate when gamers try to get political. not everyone needs to have a take about fucking hearthstone and the hong kong question or whatever.
#532
Weibo users had the right idea, anytime someone Chinese gets interviewed in the cracker media they should vocally announce their approval of the 9/11 attacks
#533
#534
babyhuey come back
#535
I mentioned babyhuey because I went back and read some of their posts ITT and finally read that Samuel T. King article about the trade war -- it's not about Hong Kong but I think I've found a way to relate the HK protests to Brexit and other forms of "right-wing populism" arising from a contradiction within the imperial center. I am a little slow on the uptake but I had a gut feeling this was the case, and I think it's clicking together in my head, with these eruptions taking the form of a contradiction between the goose and the golden eggs: or the (objective) forces of production (the goose) now being seen by dominant social formations in imperial society as contradicting their own repressive, exploitative needs -- their superstructural prizes of dominance (the golden eggs).

In the HK case, the dominance arising from the super-exploitation of the mainland Chinese working classes and migrant workers, created by HK's role as a spigot for international capital flows during a period of China's export-led development, allowing the formation within Hong Kong of a labor aristocratic identity with good jobs and higher wages. The fact that this economic model is going away and the goose is laying fewer golden eggs, however, is what's creating the befuddling situation of select political institutions and these historically dominant elements electing to threaten their own productive base.

trakfactri posted:

So this "right-wing populism" is really a compulsive freakout attempt to lock everything down "before it's too late." In other words, there's a goose and the golden eggs are the rents paid out to the yokels maintaining their dominant, superstructural position in the imperial core, but the goose is laying fewer golden eggs these days so the urge is to strangle the goose to death and ration what's left of the eggs. The goose is the base (also imperialism).


But there's nowhere to go. Brexit threatens to unravel the United Kingdom as a political entity, sparking a campaign of reactionary violence toward social groups that provoke these dominant groups' resentment (migrants), renewing hostilities in Northern Ireland and reinvigorating a secessionist movement in Scotland. The Hong Kong protesters for their part are making impossible demands, which if they could hope to achieve, would result -- in dialectical fashion -- in the People's Liberation Army rolling in the tanks, putting a decisive end to the subject, which may be a bonus depending on your perspective in a similar manner to the implosion of the United Kingdom being a net bonus for anti-imperialist forces everywhere.

There is no political crisis for capitalism at the moment, however, which means the usual Trotskyist dunderheads hoping to turn the Hong Kong labor aristocracy toward the Chinese working classes will result in an epic failure, per usual. The one thing that I haven't figured out -- if I've got a nugget of an argument here -- is why the liberal press, public opinion and now the Ted Cruz / Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez team-up duo in the U.S. have all swung so heavily in favor of the Hong Kong protests while it was divided over Brexit.

#536

trakfactri posted:

The one thing that I haven't figured out -- if I've got a nugget of an argument here -- is why the liberal press, public opinion and now the Ted Cruz / Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez team-up duo in the U.S. have all swung so heavily in favor of the Hong Kong protests while it was divided over Brexit.



Isn't it just because some of the US liberal camp benefit from the EU through their business and social dealings in the UK, but none of them win with China? Or at least, they wouldn't benefit enough from supporting Chinese integration of Hong Kong to go against the state orthodoxy of "China bad".
Although, aren't the NBA and Blizzard in the middle of some kind of scandal because they're looking out for their Chinese market share?

Edited by colddays ()

#537
There's also the very simple fact that Brexit entails problems that will have consequences for white people, and thus white people actually think about the consequences, while Hong Kong can safely (in the mind of the western bourgeoisie) operate in the sphere of pure liberal idealism divorced from any sort of material reality because they don't have any prompting to think about how the consequences might affect them. A withered spectre moans Orientalism as the curtain tears and falls off its railing, smothering the players.
#538
I just read Minqi Li's The Rise of China and the Demise of the Capitalist World Economy. I wouldn't recommend reading the whole thing since it's a collection of papers and has some problems (the whole rate of profit determined by wages vs. aggregate demand thesis) but his explanation of China's rise in relation to the already existing semi-periphery is correct and explains pretty well how the rise of China threatens both the imperialist core social democratic pact and the pact with the semi-peripheral nations for upward mobility in the world system. It's not a big leap to connect these two structural roles to a common political response.
#539
Yeah that looked interesting. Saw it pop up on a reading list.

Also, while I'm here, S. T. King's thesis on Lenin's theory of imperialism today: http://vuir.vu.edu.au/37770/1/KING%2C%20Samuel%20-%20thesis_nosignature.pdf
#540
#541
#542
Damn, wish I was that popular.
#543




#544
China please censor the large boat.