Do you know any liberal refutations of what you call myths about the PCP in this thread like there were of “Private Life of Chairman Mao”?
Do you know any liberal refutations of what you call myths about the PCP in this thread like there were of “Private Life of Chairman Mao”?
Our Gonzalite friend is wrong about an number of things, but there is real criticism to be made about Deng radically increasing poverty by undercutting the systems installed under Mao that brought poverty to low levels. The “Chinese miracle” was in many respects solving problems that it itself caused and is a sort of liberal historical revisionism, though of course the more contemporary extreme poverty eradication initiative made real headway that was not made under Mao.
Nothing you said is more unserious than
The PCP is the most advanced political party of our time
So you’re probably good
I was late in checking up on things but I appreciate what you shared
I think some of it is liberal propaganda and Deng’s reform was mainly useful for survival in capitalist encirclement, as it produced a massive degree of impoverishment for the common people early on.
You’re failing to understand that the interest of “tankies” is in democracy being enforced by a proletarian control of the state. The copypastas you were getting were poor communication but they had a point.
The fact that you’re comfortably arguing in parallel with blatant neoliberals should give you pause, or are you going to tell me they are less of a concern because they are not “authoritarian,” because when people are richer than God and control immense swaths of production and politicians themselves while skirting regulation to fuck over the workers their class made desperate by enclosing the commons, that is not “authoritarian”? This whole thing seems kind of bankrupt to me as far as political theory goes. The mechanisms of control are diffused by various means into the economy and divided among the public/private sector, but if the private sector owns the public sector (and it does) you’ve got a class of kings who only half-pretend they aren’t (Zuck deliberately getting that Caesar haircut is a tell).
There’s just no point. Literally no one among the communists I’ve seen cheers on killing dissidents just because. Fascist collaborators, sure, but not mere dissidents. You’re just inventing people to disparage.
Almost like “tankies” don’t have some religious reverence for “authority” but in fact specifically believe it should be directed in a certain way . . .
Perfectly fair, but I specify in the second paragraph:
Specifically, do you have any criticisms of China’s contemporary culture? Its government? What are they?
I was talking about the government in the economic case.
Basically just give me anything that you can be persuaded to talk about
This will also be colored by the fact that the shitheads on beehaw can’t even see what you say, but among instances that don’t block us this makes sense.
Makes perfect sense, thank you. I would have had no problem with an explanation of any length (and the forum might be interested in you making a post on this topic at some point) but I respect your time and patience.
Thank you!
wanted
If reunification has become less popular, is there a general cause of this that wouldn’t require you writing out a treatise for the sake of an offhand question?
Singapore isn’t a “city-state” in Malaysia, it was booted out of Malaysia to fulfill the comprador Malay feudal classes interests here in Malaysia,
I know nothing about this subject. Is it sort of like what happened with Hong Kong and/or Macau?
What about a male prostitute?
They are vastly, vastly less common and this is just a poor attempt at a counterpoint because conservatives also dislike male prostitutes, but the answer is that to the socialist male prostitution also represents a problem. It is a smaller problem in absolute terms, but on a “per capita” basis it is of similar severity.
“If we just remove the context of the largest human trafficking disaster Europe has seen in 30 years, it makes sense to want to be a prostitute in Ukraine!” Ukraine is literally the worst place on the continent to be doing that right now, not that it’s really the best place to do anything other than die.
You generally have a point but
and all three of those things being assumed as the only roles a woman would play in a war is just gross
??? Cooking and first aid are normal things for volunteers to do, male or female, it’s not that she’s a woman, but women seem to mostly have the good sense to not fly halfway around the world to get blown up as soldiers like some functionally-suicidal men did, even though there are certainly women on both sides of the war in combat roles.
There are some other normal volunteer roles, e.g. sanitation is very important, but you’d surely say the same thing if people were commenting on her not pursuing that (“oh! so women should be cleaners?”). Anything beyond that, like being a mechanic or nurse or something, requires a serious level of training
Your reading comprehension isn’t great. The problem isn’t that this woman is a prostitute, it’s that it’s normalizing the framing of “these men at war need access to sex,” which if you think about it for even a few seconds should raise red flags. If it is a “need,” then it is “necessary” to a war effort that it is accounted for, and suddenly you see the implication of a military prostitution industry, the existence of which would be a threat rather than a boon to impoverished women because, for this industry to be supplied, the powers that be will be sure there’s a minimum number of people who are desperate enough to sign up or else a good enough PR covering for what is actually slavery (such as corner cases of, to pick a totally random example, some woman flying halfway around the world to prostitute herself for free).
Could a self-identified Makhnovist be anything but a cultist?
Survey questions should be reversible anyway