#201

blinkandwheeze posted:

reactionary pro-imperialist trot slime white settlerist landowner male chauvinist



catchphrase!


i've gone back and forth on whether china is heading in a socialist direction probably 10 times in the last couple of years, so that should tell you there isn't an easy answer (at least from my perspective). i have a bad habit of latching onto the viewpoint of whatever article I last read... since reading about the continued drive to reduce poverty and pollution (which capitalists never care about) it leads me to believe the left wing of the party still has enough control to drift toward socialist development. of course overall, the economy is still quite mixed with the private sector playing a large role. time will tell, etc

#202
For instance, how much should a poll like this be trusted? Instinctually it feels like propaganda. What are attitudes actually like in China?

#203
i mean the issues with self-reporting social media opinion polls are pretty obvious, unless there's something unique to wechat i'm missing. i think it's safe to say that isn't representative of anything significant, even assuming the translation of the contents is accurate.
#204
the poll was attached to the bottom of a rabid right wing article sympathising with the shooter, explaining the references scrawled on his weapons, translating much of his 'manifesto' into chinese, etc. you can find the article linked in one of the replies to that tweet, for reference it is here: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/wUcvB0pUWdmaCDzpdjStJg - google translate does a good enough job of rendering this, including the poll itself so you can see what choices were presented to loyal readers who actually made it to the end of that filth.
#205
for those who aren't familiar with wechat, it's hard to make direct comparisons to western platforms but that article is somewhere between a blog post on blogger and an article posted on a facebook page, the author i'm sure has a small following of like minded dipshits and they would be the ones who took the poll. the tweet Parenti came across is the result of someone searching for something objectionable about the massacre on wechat and presenting it in the broadest terms possible in order to smear the chinese people. the whole thing is pretty revolting
#206

blinkandwheeze posted:

nobody here has ever repeated u.s. war propaganda about the uighers, everyone has gone out of their way to take a balanced and nuanced approach in investigating the issue. i've pretty much only deferred to other posters research and discussion on this question because i thought it was valuable. i have never argued "neither washington nor beijing" in my life and i unambiguously side with the PRC in any conflict with the arch-imperialist west, as little as my support means. i just don't believe in these cloying "defences" where critical support means an absolute refusal of basic scrutiny and investigation required to seek truth from facts. like Petrol said in an earlier post it's something China neither wants nor needs. the refusal to believe these issues can be investigated neuters and weakens whatever arguments you can offer in support of what you're trying to defend.

i don't actually think we have significantly different politics on this or any other issue and you're just reading things as a brutal political struggle, when nothing about these discussion warrants it and everyone else has just been approaching things in good faith as posting pals.



to contextualize this, the uigher issue is something mike pompeo calls 'the defining human rights issue of our time', the US is flying nuke bombers over chinese airspace, china is not flying bombers over the gulf of mexico. so we should treat the repetition of this war propaganda in our spaces, not the propaganda itself, with scrutiny.

war propaganda doesn't work because it's true or clever, it works by animal repetition, like a brand campaign. every time you repeat it, you breathe life into it. we see how liberals become easy marks for this. 'yes, saddam gassed the kurds, yes, qusay {the leader of the only effective post-invasion force} is insane, yes...' except nobody hears the 'but' at the end, b/c you've done your service to the nation and repeated it. if you think a careful investigation of war propaganda has ever diffused it then you are welcome to point to one time that's been true. the only difference between a liberal and a trot is the asterisk they put at the end: liberals tweak it so they can still feel like good people, trots to show how clever and above it they are. like US liberals fucking hate bush and trump but they all got in line. empire-aligned marxists in the 70s cut the legs out from the internal opposition, telling us there wasn't any socialism to defend in the USSR or cuba, for reagan's renewed assault in the 80s.

so when you ask us twice to denounce china as the home empire spins up for war, you're part of a long line of marxists. you keep saying it's personal, and your beef w/ huey (your "arch-nemesis") is personal, but it's really not. personal fights burn hot+fast but political fights are re-lit by events. do you think you've been arguing with him so long over nothing? our movement's been having this same fight for a long time, since 1917, and you're part of it.

#207

toyotathon posted:

blinkandwheeze posted:


nobody here has ever repeated u.s. war propaganda about the uighers, everyone has gone out of their way to take a balanced and nuanced approach in investigating the issue. i've pretty much only deferred to other posters research and discussion on this question because i thought it was valuable. i have never argued "neither washington nor beijing" in my life and i unambiguously side with the PRC in any conflict with the arch-imperialist west, as little as my support means. i just don't believe in these cloying "defences" where critical support means an absolute refusal of basic scrutiny and investigation required to seek truth from facts. like Petrol said in an earlier post it's something China neither wants nor needs. the refusal to believe these issues can be investigated neuters and weakens whatever arguments you can offer in support of what you're trying to defend.

i don't actually think we have significantly different politics on this or any other issue and you're just reading things as a brutal political struggle, when nothing about these discussion warrants it and everyone else has just been approaching things in good faith as posting pals.



to contextualize this, the uigher issue is something mike pompeo calls 'the defining human rights issue of our time', the US is flying nuke bombers over chinese airspace, china is not flying bombers over the gulf of mexico. so we should treat the repetition of this war propaganda in our spaces, not the propaganda itself, with scrutiny.

war propaganda doesn't work because it's true or clever, it works by animal repetition, like a brand campaign. every time you repeat it, you breathe life into it. we see how liberals become easy marks for this. 'yes, saddam gassed the kurds, yes, qusay {the leader of the only effective post-invasion force} is insane, yes...' except nobody hears the 'but' at the end, b/c you've done your service to the nation and repeated it. if you think a careful investigation of war propaganda has ever diffused it then you are welcome to point to one time that's been true. the only difference between a liberal and a trot is the asterisk they put at the end: liberals tweak it so they can still feel like good people, trots to show how clever and above it they are. like US liberals fucking hate bush and trump but they all got in line. empire-aligned marxists in the 70s cut the legs out from the internal opposition, telling us there wasn't any socialism to defend in the USSR or cuba, for reagan's renewed assault in the 80s.

so when you ask us twice to denounce china as the home empire spins up for war, you're part of a long line of marxists. you keep saying it's personal, and your beef w/ huey (your "arch-nemesis") is personal, but it's really not. personal fights burn hot+fast but political fights are re-lit by events. do you think you've been arguing with him so long over nothing? our movement's been having this same fight for a long time, since 1917, and you're part of it.



It's true that you can't be neutral on a moving train. I think posting here I feel more comfortable having these discussions and extrapolating loosely because I assume everyone that's posting is a communist and won't take anything found in bad faith. I don't discuss the allegations about Xianjing out loud anywhere else.

#208

toyotathon posted:

the only difference between a liberal and a trot is the asterisk they put at the end: liberals tweak it so they can still feel like good people, trots to show how clever and above it they are. like US liberals fucking hate bush and trump but they all got in line. empire-aligned marxists in the 70s cut the legs out from the internal opposition, telling us there wasn't any socialism to defend in the USSR or cuba, for reagan's renewed assault in the 80s.


Perhaps if one is devoid of critical thinking you could accuse people like Jose Maria Sison, the Naxalites, Senderoso Luminoso, Enver Hoxha etc, most of the anti-revisionist Marxist-Leninist tradition of being drooling Trotskyite imbeciles. Or does not being in Amerikkka somehow magically transform scientific enquiry? Is Mao wrong in the USA but right in China? Pure Manicheanism is not useful, neither is arguing purely based on an individuals context.

#209

pescalune posted:

neither is arguing purely based on an individuals context.



i'm contextualizing his posts to present conditions of US belligerence and its imperial claim on SE asian gas and oil, marxist debates before our time w/in the empire, and his arguments w/ anti-imperialists, and how he interacts here socially. marxism isn't physics, the experimental setup is constantly being changed on you, so yeah context matters. you can re-run cavendish's torsion bar gravity experiment today and get the same result for G, what would it mean to re-run the chinese revolution in the US, a country with no peasant base? all those groups/people you name-dropped understood that. the core of the theory is study, context, struggle, re-study, re-context, struggle again. so yes it's wrong to denounce china today for pompeo shit from within the empire... hopefully people here have studied enough to not fall for it.

Edited by toyotathon ()

#210
i dont get this beef
#211
you're wrong toyotathon, it is good to criticize china just like it is good to criticize ourselves and each other, unless you are imagining that (like bnw mentioned) this is some kind of political party or organization where we are supposed to do all our disagreeing privately. then i guess this public forum would just be for us to pretend-argue with each other while actually always converging on privately-agreed-on points and doing forum posts as agitprop theatre for all our many lurkers readers and fans?

the whole point of a forum is to discuss things. this is a radical leftist semi-ironic politics forum. what are we supposed to talk about
#212
Y'know, I'm starting to think that Neon Genesis Evangelion isn't all that communist after all.
#213
I think some folks are looking for a hero in china, I can't say i haven't had the same inclinations; with that said everyone has their sins, china's no different. However I think we should promote a multipolar world as the competition between blocs will open up opportunities for communist growth.

Rondey said it best.

Edited by Populares ()

#214

toyotathon posted:

so when you ask us twice to denounce china as the home empire spins up for war, you're part of a long line of marxists. you keep saying it's personal, and your beef w/ huey (your "arch-nemesis") is personal, but it's really not. personal fights burn hot+fast but political fights are re-lit by events. do you think you've been arguing with him so long over nothing? our movement's been having this same fight for a long time, since 1917, and you're part of it.


that post about huey was just a joke, i've just argued with him a lot because i think his arguments and ways of approaching things are usually specious. most of the time he has been ostensibly on "my side" of things, his turn to apologia for revisionist arguments is pretty new. like everyone else has said you've imagined a strict and brutal political battlefield here where our actions carry inordinate weight. this forum just doesn't matter that much and if you enter into discussions like you're engaging in partisan warfare and doing the important work of upholding socialism you're not going to accomplish anything except coming across as a dick.

i think your attacks are personal because you're dragging up a lot of ancient things to accuse me of weird stuff. that and you started this discussion with a request to moderate tone and asserting that the stakes on this forum "aren't that high," the complete opposite of your current position, making me think you're largely just getting too heated and spiralling to compound insults at people arguing with you.

in the future if you see discussions happening that you don't think should be occurring at all i think it would make sense for you to just not participate in them. let a thousand flowers bloom

#215
also again everyone has been completely nuanced in their discussion of the uighur national issue, and have gone out of their way to seek out and critically examine sources from both the prc and outside of it. it isn't "pompeo shit" to discuss this even if u.s. propaganda is inclined to enforce a distorted impression of events.

if anything i think it should be obvious that it's more productive to take a real approach in seeking truth from facts to demonstrate where such popular narratives fall short and what they're distorting, rather than actively ignoring it and leaving it up to bloodthirsty propagandists as the only viable source of information as to what's occurring
#216

the title of the youtube is, "Is China Socialist"
#217
#218

swampman posted:

Y'know, I'm starting to think that Neon Genesis Evangelion isn't all that communist after all.


i know we like to joke around here but this is beyond the pale. Mods, ban this chucklefuck

#219
Well I'm glad to see everyone here is just as extremely racist, stupid, and lazy as ever. Anyway good work that one comment from get fiscal, and some of the toyotathon posts I lightly skimmed. Everyone else: shut the fuck up and read more. There's a ton of information about Xinjiang, CCP national policy, and the strong national development and affirmative action policies in place. I'm pretty sure I've cast pearls before you swine before and showed that Uyghurs are over represented in top CCP leadership versus their share of the general population (as are Tibetans, actually). Now tell me, what oppressor puts their colonized subject in to top leadership, in fact ensuring their overrepresentation within it? What great chauvinist slaver ensures the rapid overall development of its underdeveloped colonies? These aren't difficult things to track down, and yet these basic facts of the country you're 'criticizing' alongside your genocidal, chauvinist masters don't even figure into your critique. Wonderful materialism here! What do I expect from the fools crowing about the great proletarian cultural revolution and senderoso luminoso (lmao) and in the same breath denouncing a peaceful, large-scale anti-terrorism measure developing unity and political consciousness. Good lord why are you people still doing this. Go read.

https://www.docdroid.net/g1pAYQr/inner-asia-volume-2-issue-2-2000-doi-1011632f146481700793647788-sautman-barry-is-xinjiang-an-internal-colony.pdf


https://www.docdroid.net/4BBcnCh/ethnic-representation-in-the-current-chinese-leadership.pdf
#220
hi crow
#221
Also I don't think that the highest levels of the government of one of the largest countries in the world (one which is developing so rapidly and with such highly competent and organized focus that it's making the heads of imperial grand strategists spin like the angriest propeller beanies on earth) can't put out logically consistent information on a point they've been attacked by genocidaires and opportunists alike. I think it's more likely instead that you're a racist moron who thinks the best and brightest of the inferior Orientals are no match for your casual hobbyist analysis. Just like all the dumbass cracker 'national security analysts' and 'China watchers' shitting out their half-assed colonizer squawk on Twitter from their DC offices. Unlike them, though, you're doing this for free like a grade A sucker
#222

karphead posted:

hi crow


bye for now! kisses!

#223
Oh also I saw in the other Uyghur thread that you chauvinist idiots think that "sucking cock" is an acceptable insult to throw around as a communist. That's cool lol
#224
#225
Please, relax.... Some posters here do still believe that the brightest inferior Oriental is an equal match for their casual hobbyist analysis
#226

Crow posted:

Well I'm glad to see everyone here is just as extremely racist, stupid, and lazy as ever. Anyway good work that one comment from get fiscal, and some of the toyotathon posts I lightly skimmed. Everyone else: shut the fuck up and read more. There's a ton of information about Xinjiang, CCP national policy, and the strong national development and affirmative action policies in place. I'm pretty sure I've cast pearls before you swine before and showed that Uyghurs are over represented in top CCP leadership versus their share of the general population (as are Tibetans, actually). Now tell me, what oppressor puts their colonized subject in to top leadership, in fact ensuring their overrepresentation within it? What great chauvinist slaver ensures the rapid overall development of its underdeveloped colonies? These aren't difficult things to track down, and yet these basic facts of the country you're 'criticizing' alongside your genocidal, chauvinist masters don't even figure into your critique. Wonderful materialism here! What do I expect from the fools crowing about the great proletarian cultural revolution and senderoso luminoso (lmao) and in the same breath denouncing a peaceful, large-scale anti-terrorism measure developing unity and political consciousness. Good lord why are you people still doing this. Go read.

https://www.docdroid.net/g1pAYQr/inner-asia-volume-2-issue-2-2000-doi-1011632f146481700793647788-sautman-barry-is-xinjiang-an-internal-colony.pdf


https://www.docdroid.net/4BBcnCh/ethnic-representation-in-the-current-chinese-leadership.pdf




The first was a great read, a few arguments in it should be scrutinized (i.e representation vs tokenism) but it lays out a comprehensive and convincing argument that the inequality between countryside and metropole isn't really colonial in nature. The rest of your comment was positively dogshit however, "you genocidal chauvinists cant see that no one could carry out undue repression of a people AND have affirmitive action programs for them" isnt convincing to anyone who has been part of an affirmitive action program. Id also like to point out that both sources are from quite a while ago, though that seems to be a limitation all of us are running into since there are few trustworthy contemporary sources interested in scholarly analysis over propandizing ever since this became a soft-power issue

Edited by Fayafi ()

#227
Lol how many more white people are we going to get here accusing Caesura of being guilty of genocidal white chauvinism
#228

Caesura109 posted:

Crow posted:
Well I'm glad to see everyone here is just as extremely racist, stupid, and lazy as ever. Anyway good work that one comment from get fiscal, and some of the toyotathon posts I lightly skimmed. Everyone else: shut the fuck up and read more. There's a ton of information about Xinjiang, CCP national policy, and the strong national development and affirmative action policies in place. I'm pretty sure I've cast pearls before you swine before and showed that Uyghurs are over represented in top CCP leadership versus their share of the general population (as are Tibetans, actually). Now tell me, what oppressor puts their colonized subject in to top leadership, in fact ensuring their overrepresentation within it? What great chauvinist slaver ensures the rapid overall development of its underdeveloped colonies? These aren't difficult things to track down, and yet these basic facts of the country you're 'criticizing' alongside your genocidal, chauvinist masters don't even figure into your critique. Wonderful materialism here! What do I expect from the fools crowing about the great proletarian cultural revolution and senderoso luminoso (lmao) and in the same breath denouncing a peaceful, large-scale anti-terrorism measure developing unity and political consciousness. Good lord why are you people still doing this. Go read.

https://www.docdroid.net/g1pAYQr/inner-asia-volume-2-issue-2-2000-doi-1011632f146481700793647788-sautman-barry-is-xinjiang-an-internal-colony.pdf


https://www.docdroid.net/4BBcnCh/ethnic-representation-in-the-current-chinese-leadership.pdf




The first was a great read, a few arguments in it should be scrutinized (i.e representation vs tokenism) but it lays out a comprehensive and convincing argument that the inequality between countryside and metropole isn't really colonial in nature. The rest of your comment was positively dogshit however, "you genocidal chauvinists cant see that no one could carry out undue repression of a people AND have affirmitive action programs for them" isnt convincing to anyone who has been part of an affirmitive action program

Edited by Caesura109 (yesterday 20:34:47)


yeah. one thing youll notice about revisionism is that all the same bourgeois positivist nonsense that gets flagged as obvious bullshit when it’s said by liberal idealogues and world bank officials suddenly starts coming out of the mouths of quote unquote communists if the subject turns to something they’re intellectually insecure about.

#229
Genuinely deleted a paragraph about how much of the arguments are just parotting neoliberals. The best trends and policies described in that piece are the ones counter to such an approach.
#230

blinkandwheeze posted:

Lol how many more white people are we going to get here accusing Caesura of being guilty of genocidal white chauvinism



While i appreciate the sentiment, i disagree that poc cant believe in or parrot genocidal white chauvinist views and talking points, especially western-educated ones, or that they dont often bring their own ethnic/religious chauvinism into their critiques of other peoples and their societies. such criticisms are warranted... when theyre in good faith.

#231
sure man but i still wouldn’t let the crackers in here say shit to me
#232

Caesura109 posted:

While i appreciate the sentiment, i disagree that poc cant believe in or parrot genocidal white chauvinist views and talking points, especially western-educated ones, or that they dont often bring their own ethnic/religious chauvinism into their critiques of other peoples and their societies. such criticisms are warranted... when theyre in good faith.


That's true of course but i think your post specifying your motivations for engaging in these concerns was obviously reasonable and didn't read as chauvinist in any sense. people ignoring it are obviously doing so in bad faith simply to yell at people in an internet argument, & for fellow cracker posters to be doing so makes it even more ridiculous.

nothing in your arguments suggest you're bringing any kind of chauvinist perspective here and it's clearly just white people using accusations of racial impropriety as a weapon

#233
hi crow. the links are great but why don't you save the insults for facebook memes, so white college aged bourgeois liberals have something to annoy their families with for a couple of years until they discover 'radical centrism'.
#234

Petrol posted:

hi crow. the links are great but why don't you save the insults for facebook memes, so white college aged bourgeois liberals have something to annoy their families with for a couple of years until they discover 'radical centrism'.


radical centrism is what you call it when a 16 yr old tankie hits the tl with a spicy xi jinping meme promoting the theory of the productive forces

#235
In any case i think Petrol's earlier post that the PRC neither wants nor needs the pathetic cloying defences that refuse to allow any scrutiny on current events on the ground is important. the attempts to "protect" Chinese efforts by decrying any scrutiny and discussion just reeks of insecurity in the actual positions trying to be defended. if all study & investigation is meant to be done in private without any public facing conversation then there's no reason for this board to exist, except as some kind of agitprop political theatre like Dr. Cat suggested.
#236

blinkandwheeze posted:

then there's no reason for this board to exist,


delicate sound of a soap bubble bursting

#237
Ah f*ck sorry everyone. Rip
#238
I think it's pretty clear that you can still carry out colonialist/imperialist policies even if the leadership is of whatever nationality or ethnicity they're governing over. That's one of the first things I derived from reading about neocolonialism.

Edited by serafiym ()

#239
I haven't had a chance to read it, but the State Council just released a white paper about its Xinjiang policies

http://english.gov.cn/archive/white_paper/2019/03/18/content_281476567813306.htm
#240
what's the 'revisionist' or whatever line on the shining path, because they dont seem particularly funny to me just in general. maybe a small chuckle here and there, at the most. serious question, not just being flippant.