Lmao Chinese can’t even move to the other cities of their own country.
Not an American or a liberal, and yes, china is authoritarian. Is america better? No. The credit score system in the US is also bad.
Authoritarian is a meaningless pejorative.
The social credit score isn’t real.
Everybody disliked that
You can dislike it all you want doesn’t make it less true.
You ain’t wrong about the social credit thing! There was only one municipality that tried to implement it in any way that even vaguely resembles how mainstream media hysterics portray, and that city’s administration was punished for it on the national stage.
The only thing the “social credit” system was meant to do is make major public figures accountable for corruption. It was never aimed at REGULAR people!
But yeah nah fuck anyone and anything that opposed democracy especially the two faced single political party of the United States of America. If they actually gave a shit about democracy for real instead of just consuming lives to pay for their pedophilia addictions, we’d have ranked choice voting by now.
As good as preferential/ranked voting is. Compulsory voting would have a much larger positive impact on US’ democracy
Ideally both
How will compulsive voting improve anything? Now you’re dragging even more uninformed dopes to vote, a lot of them will vote for spite. Far more than you realize, I think
Trump was 100% the vote-for-spite-burn-it-down candidate. That’s how they get you, the old switcheroo
That doesn’t happen in reality
Now you’re dragging even more uninformed dopes to vote, a lot of them will vote for spite.
uninformed defines almost all american voters and the last election showed that 30 million people who voted in 2020, chose not to vote in 2024 instead of spite voting.
Neither can fix the systemic problems caused by capitalism though, democracy in capitalism is democracy for capitalists.
Well then use that amendment that children keep dying for or stop complaining. So pathetic
I already organize with a communist party, I have no intention of simply complaining alone.
What good is complaining amongst a communist org, if your democracy and elections a rlcapitalist?
Please stop financing and enabling the USA, also, and stop using the US dollar for international trade. So lame that you haven’t done that
I actively steal from the USA
Many far right countries (australia, japan, south korea) use ranked choice voting… it doesn’t make a bit of difference. If capitalists control the political system, then they will stack candidates and fund the campaigns that support their interests, and the “democracy” there is nothing but political theatre.
Outside of Marxists, even the ancient greeks knew that representative government is just another name for plutocracy, because only wealthy / landed family have the money and prestige to fund campaigns to get themselves elected. Liberals still haven’t learned this simple lesson.
In what world is Australia far right? Center right/neoliberal today maybe. But not far fight, especially compared to other countries
Also I recommend compulsory voting.
In this world, the world where open support for genocide is bipartisan in Australian politics
I do not and will not dispute that either.
Unfortunately I don’t think ranked choice voting will save you. You need to clear the board so to speak and get some options that actually represent people over corporate interests.
You do realize that ranked choice voting is one of the simplest and least violent ways to push forward progressive candidates right? Because it makes people comfortable with voting options that with first past the post would be throw away votes
That makes sense, and then you look at Europe and realise the issues at hand are systemic, caused by material conditions and bourgeois democratic electoralism is never going to fix those issues.
Much of Europe already uses ranked choice or proportional voting, yet remains austerity-ridden and sliding toward the far right because it is still under the dictatorship of capital. The voting mechanism is secondary to the concrete material conditions: capital’s imperative to accumulate, the commodification of labor, and the state’s role as an instrument of class rule. Until that dictatorship is overthrown, electoral reform is rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship.
The core contradictions at hand are:
Socialized production versus private appropriation:workers collectively create value, but capitalists expropriate the surplus
The tendency of the rate of profit to fall: as organic composition of capital rises, profitability declines, forcing capital to seek new fixes
Overaccumulation and underconsumption: capital produces more than can be profitably sold, leading to crisis, layoffs, and austerity
The contradiction between capital’s global mobility and labor’s relative immobility, which fuels a race to the bottom in wages and protections.
As imperialism declines (neocolonial extraction becomes costlier, interimperialist rivalry intensifies, and the Global South resists outright plunder) capital can no longer rely on external superprofits to offset domestic falling rates of profit. The response is internal repression: austerity to slash social wages, union-busting to weaken labor power, surveillance to preempt dissent, and the normalization of authoritarian governance. This is capital’s logical reaction to crisis.
This dynamic mirrors Weimar Germany: economic crisis, delegitimized liberal parties, and a bourgeoisie that ultimately backed fascism to crush the organized working class and restore “order” for capital. Today’s far-right surge is the same phenomenon: capital’s emergency management when consent can no longer be manufactured through bourgeois democracy alone.
Voting under these conditions is not a path to liberation; it is a ritual that legitimizes the managers of decline. For voting to matter, you must overthrow the dictatorship of capital and reach the synthesis of these contradictions: a revolutionary transformation that socializes production, abolishes exploitation, and builds a state that serves human need, not profit. Only then does political power and thereby voting become meaningful.
Ranked choice and proportional voting are 2 very different concepts. You are falsely pretending they’re similar when they’re wildly different concepts. Only Ireland presently uses it from the eu, because they as well have an establishment, and ranked choice voting is anti establishment at its core.
Why are you trying to pretend they’re the same concept?
How do you expect to have a revolution if 90% of people don’t agree with your viewpoint? And I say that as a socialist. Pushing forward the agenda over the course of decades is more likely to be successful than a single revolution, in my opinion.
Yes, they are different, but the point at the core of my argument is that it’s irrelevant as they serve the same purpose at their core.
Whether it’s s RCV or MMP, the outcome remains austerity, imperialist foreign policy, and rising far-right influence because the state remains an instrument of capital. Ballot mechanics don’t override class power. RCV isn’t “anti-establishment at its core”; it’s a procedural tweak that can just as easily stabilize bourgeois legitimacy.
How do you expect to have a revolution if 90% of people don’t agree with your viewpoint?
In my country the revolution has already happened. We now conduct class struggle through party debate and socialist democracy, not bourgeois elections.
Also revolutionary consciousness isn’t a precondition you wait for, it is forged through struggle. The 90% figure is wrong for a start, even in the US communist sympathys are quickly growing, you also assumes static opinions under static conditions, but material crises radicalize people faster than decades of electoral gradualism. Reformism doesn’t build toward socialism, it manages capitalism more palatably and demobilizes movements by channeling energy into cycles of hope and disappointment.
Pushing forward the agenda over the course of decades is more likely to be successful than a single revolution, in my opinion.
History suggests otherwise. Social democracy produced the welfare state only under the unique pressure of postwar reconstruction and Soviet competition, then dismantled it once those pressures faded (and even that was built off massive exploitation and imperialism in the periphery). Capital concedes reforms only when forced and retracts them the moment profitability demands it. Waiting for electoral consensus while the climate burns, fascism rises, and imperialism massacres isn’t a strategy. Bourgeois democracy won’t let you vote through its own abolition. The task for those still under bourgeois democracy is to build dual power: organs of working-class authority that can confront and replace the dictatorship of capital. That’s how you can make voting matter.
Alas, I fear the US might be too far gone for ranked choice to have an effect.
The problem is quality of candidates. Since Citizen’s United opened the door for unlimited corporate money in elections, literally 90% of candidates are on someone’s payroll. “Grassroots” is a thing of the past. Mass media and name recognition are everything.
Haha, you think the epstein class will allow you to vote away their fascism
It’s an important reform no matter what, even if we have to resort to other methods to take out the class first.
Re: authoritarianism— your opinion.
Some of us aren’t in favour of oppressive regimes that aren’t transparent, surveil, and censor.
“Authoritarianism” is meaningless because all it means is “uses state power.” It doesn’t acknowledge which class controls the state and who it uses state power against. In China, the working classes control the state, and use state power against bad actors and capitalists more than anything else. China is oppressive to capitalists and liberating to workers.
Tell that to the Uyghurs…
There is no genocide of Uyghurs. Uyghur genocide atrocity propaganda akin to claiming that there’s “white genocide” in South Africa, Christian genocide in Nigeria, or that Hamas sexually assaulted babies in Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.
In the case of Xinjiang, the area is crucial in the Belt and Road Initiative, so the west backed sepratist groups in order to destabilize the region. China responded with vocational programs and de-radicalization efforts, which the west then twisted into claims of “genocide.” Nevermind that the west responds to seperatism with mass violence, and thus re-education programs focused on rehabilitation are far more humane, the tool was used both for outright violence by the west into a useful narrative to feed its own citizens.
The best and most comprehensive resource I have seen so far is Qiao Collective’s Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation. Qiao Collective is explicitly pro-PRC, but this is an extremely comprehensive write-up of the entire background of the events, the timeline of reports, and real and fake claims.
I also recommend reading the UN report and China’s response to it. These are the most relevant accusations and responses without delving into straight up fantasy like Adrian Zenz, professional propagandist for the Victims of Communism Foundation, does.
Tourists do go to Xinjiang all the time as well. You can watch videos like this one on YouTube, though it obviously isn’t going to be a comprehensive view of a complex situation like this.
Quote all the bullshit you want Cowbee. The world knows the truth 🙂
Do you have any proof? The OISC disagree with you. And even the UN doesn’t call it a genocide because that’s not what happened.
“the world”
Please explain how what I said is “bullshit,” I even included the UN report. Why do you like Adrian Zenz?
I’m using the term to refer to suppression of people (which isn’t restricted to workers) in politics, media, etc.
Except by “the people” you seem to mean capitalists and fascists, not the broad majority of society that are uplifted and support the system.
This!
China is a capitalist dynasty my guy. What is liberating about 5 year olds making shoes in a factory?
China is a socialist country, public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state. Child labor is illegal in China, you may be thinking of the US.
I haven’t much evidence for the claim: “In China, the working classses control the state”
sure you will say that is my western bias from living with china bad propaganda, but you could actually provide something to me read on topic if possible
You can debate whether the system works well, but it isn’t accurate to say there’s no evidence for the claim that the working classes play a central role in the Chinese state.
China’s constitution explicitly defines the PRC as a socialist state “led by the working class and based on the alliance of workers and peasants,” with state power exercised through the National People’s Congress (NPC) system. The NPC is the highest organ of state power, with nearly 3,000 deputies drawn from provinces, the PLA, and different social sectors.
The makeup of the NPC is not just party bureaucrats or business elites. In the 14th NPC there are hundreds of deputies from workers and farmers and large numbers of grassroots representatives, along with 442 ethnic minority deputies covering all 55 minority groups. Most deputies in China’s people’s congress system (about 95%) serve at the county and township level, which are directly elected and involve hundreds of millions of voters. Higher congresses are elected from these lower levels. This structure is what China calls “whole-process people’s democracy.” Sources explaining the system include CGTN’s Who runs the CPC and the State Council white paper China: Democracy That Works.
You can also look at how the state treats capital. China has private capital, but it is clearly subordinated to state goals. When Jack Ma tried to push an aggressive fintech model through Ant Group that would massively expand lightly regulated consumer credit, regulators halted the IPO and forced restructuring under stricter oversight. That is a case of disciplining capital when it conflicts with social stability and the broader economy.
Likewise, China has pursued policies like eliminating extreme poverty and building massive infrastructure networks (including projects that are not monetarily profitable) because they are treated as long-term public development goals. That kind of large-scale, socially oriented investment is difficult to sustain in systems where private capital dominates the state.
So you can disagree with the Chinese model, but there is actually a large amount of Chinese material explaining how their system is supposed to function and why they claim it represents working-class political power.
Sure!
The Chinese political system is based on whole-process people’s democracy, a form of consultative democracy. The local government is directly elected, and then these governments elect people to higher rungs, meaning any candidate at the top level must have worked their way up from the bottom and directly proved themselves. Moreover, the economy in the PRC is socialist, with public ownership as the principle aspect of the economy. Combining this consultative, ground-up democracy with top-down economic planning is the key to China’s success.
I highly recommend Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance. Socialist democracy has been imperfect, but has gone through a number of changes and adaptations over the years as we’ve learned more from testing theory to practice. Boer goes over the history behind socialist democracy in this textbook.
The working classes in socialist countries are the ones dictating the state and its direction.
Still better then the baby eating pedo elite
It is possible to oppose all three things. It is possible to simultaneously oppose the Social Credit System in China, the Credit Score system in the United States, and the elites connected to Jeffrey Epstein.
Is it? You need to think more pragmatically, you are a laborer. Your only bargaining chip is your labour, decide who gets it. Personally, I don’t want to be part of any helping them live their best life.
I am curious, who is “them” in your statement and how does opposing all three of those things inherently cause me to give up my bargaining power?
No don’t, you never will. You’ll always contribute what ever system you’re a part of. Just choose one and the chienese might do a lot of bad things but they aren’t the pedofile baby eating elites.
The social credit system that you know of doesn’t exist.
Interesting phrasing. A phrasing that assumes assumptions on my part. So … what social credit system DOES exist.
I am a Chinese minority living in China. You really don’t know what you’re talking about when it comes to China. You very clearly have done 0 research beyond maybe reading RFA. You should be quiet until you have done some proper research.
You can’t possibly be a minority in China, what with all those intact organs.
Ad hominem, ad hominem, and mmm, ad hominem. Yeah, nothing to see here.
“Homnum Homnum”- Liberal chimps.
Least insufferable redditer
Not an adhominem. You’re not wrong because you’re stupid you just happen to be both wrong and stupid.
Well in the comment I said that you didn’t explain why I was wrong and simply resorted to making a string of ad hominems.
So I’ll reiterate: ad hominem, ad hominem, ad hominem.
Saying you should shut up if you haven’t researched a topic isn’t an adhominem.
It isn’t an ad hominem fallacy to point out that doing little research on a topic and repeating easily disproven talking points isn’t a sound basis of argument.
And I have, and my responses were given little in return from them.
You have not, considering everything you’ve said has been easily debunked, and when encountering hard numbers you reflect to dogmatism.
Authoritarian is a meaningless pejorative.
Fucking kek
The social credit score isn’t real.
Ultra double fucking kek
Go back to 4chan obergruppenfuhrer. Or provide some evidence/analysis but I doubt you have that capability.
In a world where credit is allocated on the basis of trust, all credit is social credit
I don’t care what other countries do to a degree where we need to intervene their governance with military or covert actions, I don’t understand their culture, their history, their people, their way of thinking to force democracy across the world. I only care about protecting our country, our people and leaving the world the fuck alone. I feel like that’s how most of the world works.
But China is authoritarian.
There sure is a lot of pro-Russian propaganda from Russian state-controlled media like Sputnik News and Russia Today on this account, sprinkled in there with the downvoted and divisive liberal-hating memes.
Cope
One of us may not be coping very well.
deleted by creator
Some folks need to hear the same thing 50 times before they fuck off
This deep into the Gaza genocide, anyone with two neurons to spark together hates liberals. Smug, conspiratorial fascists-in-denial who will spend decades helping to strangle you, then criticize the way you breathe.
If you’re pro Russia, you’re pro-genocide.
Yeah, supporting the country whose fighting the empire, rooting out nazis, and stopping a genocide is being “for genocide”. Do you libs ever question your sources or what??
.world user
makes sense, thats probably a no then?
Russia rooting out nazis. Fighting the empire? Wild.
Putin IS a nazi. Russia IS an imperialist regime. Are we not going to talk about Russia’s imperialist attacks? Is that all chill? The attacks on Ukraine are equivalent to genocide historically.
Simply because Russia is anti-US, doesn’t make it free of guilt for much of the same actions the US takes.
You should stop trivialising the word genocide.
Trivializing? They have literal concentration camps for Uyghurs. You know, the things used for the Jewish genocide/holocaust by Hitler.
Stop defending china and call it out for its unethical actions.
There are no concentration camps? There were prisons where terrorists were rehabilitated and vocational schools. Neither of these are concentration camps. When was the last time you were in Xinjiang? Uyghur is widely spoken and all signs are in Uyghur and Chinese. There were some abuses during the crackdown on ETIM and that was bad but that has already been corrected and abuses are not genocide you should stop trivialising the word genocide.
Yea Russia is really rooting out those Nazis in Ukraine lol, maybe if you simp for Putin harder you won’t get conscripted into the meat grinder. Best of luck to you in your crusade to end genocide by spreading Russian propaganda. 👋
Yea Russia is really rooting out those Nazis in Ukraine lol,
I know liberals struggle with this concept, but saying true things sarcastically actually does not make them less true
It’s like saying, “Invading Iran is okay because their state is bad.” It’s not okay - look at how much suffering it causes. And for what? Simply replacing one oligarchy with another.
Pure projection
1- Provided with reasoning/analogy 2- “Projection”.
Smh.
“Reasoning” lol try harder halfwit
We call that an ad hominem, sire.
An ad hominem is when an argument consists of a personal attack, this is just a personal attack dumbass, you never presented an argument worth rebutting, go back to reddit
I am begging you to please read a book.
Lmao
-You don’t even know what ad hominem means, dumbass
-This isn’t the high school debate club you peaked in
I’m well aware of the USA’s complicity in genocide. You seem to be unaware of Russia’s.
It’s really bizarre to be against genocide and unabashedly pro-Russia while spreading their insane genocidal propaganda.
I think you don’t really care about genocide, I think you’d rather just see more of it from the Republican Party because you’re a paid Russian asset.
I’m aware of liberals throwing the word genocide around in regard to shit that is demonstrably not genocide, and accusing everyone who disagrees of being a bot or a paid enemy agent. This is also projection, you are a morally bankrupt lackey of a dying empire and you are losing and you are coping poorly with it.
I wouldn’t make said accusations—and I’m not a liberal— but Russia is involved in genocide.
You did, you are, and no lol
*pro Trolley Problem
Fixed.
“propaganda”
Yeah, I guess thats what you’ve been conditioned to spout when encountering non-empire-sanctioned news sources ha ha!
Just as long as we’re on the same page that this post is from a pro-Russian account, which I think is pretty apparent at this point.
Silly, this is .ml for marxists. We’re all pro-China, russia and even gasp pro-DPRK because we don’t shun from news sources that havent been deemed worthy by the empire
I never understood how being a marxist has anything to do with being pro-putin, who is obviously the exact opposite of a marxist.
You’re conflating Marxist methodology with liberal moralism. Marxists do not offer abstract “pro/anti” judgments based on a regime’s ideology, but analyze states through their structural position in the global system. Contemporary Russia is indeed an oligarchic capitalist state, but its integration into global capitalism is asymmetric and subordinate. Its economy remains heavily dependent on raw material exports rather than high-value capital export, and it lacks the core instruments of modern imperialism: dominance over global financial institutions, reserve currency status, and the ability to enforce structural adjustment. Unlike the U.S., Russia cannot print the world’s reserve currency to finance overseas expansion or weaponize SWIFT-level financial infrastructure against rivals.
This material reality limits Russia’s capacity for classic imperialist expansion as Lenin defined it, namely, the dominance of finance capital and the export of capital as the primary mechanism of exploitation. Russia’s capital accumulation model, centered on resource rents and regional security projection, does not replicate this. It lacks the deep financial markets, technological monopoly rents, and institutional leverage that allow core imperial powers to extract surplus globally through “peaceful”(generally far from peaceful in reality) and economic means. Its military actions, therefore, function more as defensive geopolitics or regional balancing than as instruments of systematic capital expansion.
Precisely because Russia cannot compete with entrenched imperial powers on their terms, its rational strategy is to undermine unipolarity. Supporting multipolar institutions like BRICS and the SCO, opposing NATO expansion, and backing states resisting U.S. pressure are not expressions of socialist solidarity, but materially rational moves for a subordinate capitalist power seeking strategic autonomy. The objective effect (fragmenting U.S. hegemonic control) creates space for anti-imperialist struggles globally, regardless of Putin’s subjective intentions.
Our support is therefore entirely critical and conditional. We recognize that Russia’s structural position leads it, out of self-interest, to back anti-imperialist struggles, and we support those objective anti-hegemonic actions because they weaken the primary engine of global imperialist exploitation. Simultaneously, we oppose its internal reactionary politics, oligarchic structure, and any chauvinist or expansionist tactics that harm working-class solidarity. This is not a logical contradiction, it is dialectical materialism: judging policies by their concrete role in the global class struggle, not by the ideological labels of leaders. Reducing this analysis to “pro-Putin” ignores Marxism’s core method: follow the motion of material forces, not the slogans of statesmen.
Marxists are certainly critical of Putin and the Russian Federation, and see it as an incredible fall from their proud and progressive soviet past. However, the biggest obstacle to socialism globally is the US Empire, and Russia is presently playing a progressive international role in undermining it, and being a valuable trading partner for countries like China, Venezuela, the DPRK, etc. Further, the biggest opposition faction to the nationalists are the communists, not the liberals, so in time it is likely they will return to socialism.
Very fair question. We’re not pro-Putin. We’re not even Pro-Russia. We’re pro-a few, specific actions that Russia has taken and is taking. Previously.
Two kinds of people in the comments: those who think credit scores are bad, and those who think social credit systems are good
Noone actually forces you to live in debt. It should be last resort, but people in US finance everything
but people in US finance everything
Damn I wonder why they do that. Must have nothing to do poverty. /s
Noone actually forces you to live in debt
Oh damn I didn’t know they made housing and healthcare free, that’s dope as fuck
No you don’t understand you can just become homeless and then let yourself die of preventable causes.
No you don’t understand you can just become homeless
Isn’t that illegal in the US
I wouldn’t be surprised but I am neither amerikkkan nor have I looked into that.
Only if you insist on sleeping.
Sleeping is authoritarian
Come on like half of car sales in US are financed.
You know that Healthcare and housing is the last resort I’m talking about - where you have no other option.
The US is reliant on cars, but many people cannot afford buying them outright or low-interest loans. This is by design, not choice.
Bullshit. Used car market exists since the invention of a car. If you need a vehicle that will drive your ass from point A to the point B you absolutely have no need to buy a brand new one.
The used car market is volitile, regional, and often close to new in price. Stop blaming systemic issues on actions of individuals. I’m not saying that it’s impossible for one to make poor financial decisions, but instead that the very system is designed around maximizing profits squeezed from the working classes.
deleted by creator
Okay, but tbf, pledging allegiance to the flag/country is much better than to the self alleged dictator.
Is it though? We are currently seeing the forced nationalism be weaponized.
That’s because people confuse nationalism with patriotism. I love my country, which is why I want it to be better. Others love their country because it gives them permission to be worse.
To be clear, it’s still not good. I support any kid that wants to sit out for the pledge or sit or kneel for the national anthem. It should always be non-obligatory. In fact, I don’t love the word “allegiance” to begin with.
But it would be significantly worse if the pledge of allegiance was to Donal Trump. Ultimately, that’s what many people are following, but it’s not default in schools to pledge allegiance to him or anything.
I just cannot understand why somebody living in a colonial country can truly say they love their country unless they’re brainwashed or completely ignorant to its history.
I’m from Canada and we are not better, there’s just not as much of an issue of rampant nationalism disguised as “patriotism”. Our countries were built on the graves of the native inhabitants, by the hands of slaves. At no point in the history did they stop abusing natives and the descendants of slaves, they just found new ways to hide it and new names to call it (how does a prison make a profit, anyway?).
I love and am proud of my community, but that is the extent to which my pride reaches. I cannot feel proud of a country that was built on the blood of the innocent.
I love my country,
Not even sure how to respond to this kind of vague emotional ideology. When people say this kinda stuff to me in person, I back away slowly.
I want America to prosper and I want to protect American values from right-wing radicals that are in charge. I’m very passionate about it. In fact, I live in a red state and I want it to just be better and no longer radicalized by lies and hate.
I very passionately want America to heal from this illness of hate and apathy.
If that makes me a bad person, then fuck me I guess.
“American values” are freedom for a few selected individuals, this shit is ass.
The values that you probably want is incompatible with capitalism and never truly existed in America, you love the idea of it not the reality.
The US Empire is a genocidal settler-colony. It cannot be rescued from itself, it needs to be overthrown.
I don’t think it can be overthrown today; surveillance of means of communication is now total; their only restriction is the massive amount of data.
It CAN collapse in on itself, that is inevitable.
I would be delighted if I was proved wrong.
American values
The values of the US settler-colonial project, are native eviction, and genocide.
The values of the indigenous peoples were not considered worthy to the european settlers, so they did their best to wipe out hundreds of peoples/tribes/cultures. You either don’t know that history, or worse, you are proud of it.
I highly suggest reading both An indigenous people’s history of the US by Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, or her Not a nation of immigrants.
Not necessarily bad, but definitely indoctrinated, as many of us once were. The truth is a series of bitter pills, and the government and media aren’t going to offer them to you; they’re going to distract you from them. Which is easy to do, given how bitter the pills are.
I’ve been in the process of making a powerpoint-esque presentation to show to my friends who haven’t read any theory and the thought of framing and organizing it as “bitter pills” is super exciting to me. Starting out the presentation with definitions and history would’ve made them fall asleep.
Absolutely!
Ummm…how though?
Who knows one day you might get it and see they are the same motivators to for gullibles to go to war.
It doesn’t matter if it’s for their leader or the country.
It’s always for the owners of both.
nowadays it’s more accurately the same statement for both
people are praising the supreme leader in america
I donno anything about China, but whoever made this meme certainly doesn’t know anything about the USA. The idea that “liberals” or anyone else (??) are high-fiving themselves over a credit score. lol
WOOOSH!
They’re high-fiving themselves about being able to buy a house. DUR.
Under capitalism basic human needs are allocated only to the most privileged.
Many many libs celebrate their participation in this privilege, especially in terms of housing.
State-enforced privilege is basically the entire goal of liberalism.
People like thay exist. In the same way that 40 year olds high five themselves for still fitting into the pants they wore in hs.
The only ones celebrating credit scores as a concept are lenders, the true capitalists
Marxists-Leninists (as in, the ML in lemmy.ml) use the term “liberals” to describe anyone living under a Western capitalist system. Especially MLs on Lemmy, they consider any username not from the Tankie Triad to be liberal (or anarchist, which is somehow worse).
It’s really dumb, possibly even a psyop. Because according to militant left the true communism has never been achieved, therefore everyone on earth is under a western capitalist system
This is nonsense. Communism has not been achieved, but socialism absolutely has. Communism has not been achieved not for lack of trying, but because it is a post-socialist system. There’s no psyop.
First, let’s be precise about terms: capitalism is defined by private ownership of the means of production, profit-driven accumulation, and wage labor; socialism is defined by social ownership (state, collective, or cooperative), planning mechanisms, and the subordination of remaining market forces to developmental and social goals. They are distinct modes of production, not a binary where anything short of stateless communism “counts” as capitalism.
Second, “Western capitalism” isn’t a universal default, it specifically describes the Euro-Amerikan core and its integrated vassals (NATO, Five Eyes, dependent economies). That system is hegemonic, but it is not total. Russia, for instance, operates a distinct sovereign-capitalist model: not socialist, but explicitly de-linked from Western financial architecture and actively contesting unipolar dominance.
Third, China, Cuba, Laos, and Vietnam are explicitly in the early stages of the socialist transitionary period. Their frameworks (especially China’s “primary stage of socialism”) theorize that underdeveloped socialist states must develop productive forces, utilize regulated markets, and engage globally while maintaining proletarian state power and public ownership of commanding heights. This isn’t “capitalism with red flags”; it’s a materialist strategy to build the basis for higher-stage socialism. Dismissing these distinctions because communism hasn’t been “achieved” yet misunderstands dialectics: transition is a process, not an event. You don’t call a bridge under construction meaningless because it has yet to reach the other side.
“liberal” denotes adherence to bourgeois democracy and capitalist property relations, (pro bourgeois democracy and private property)
The critique of certain “anarchists” is that they guise reactionary politics in radical language, which aids capitalism.
No? I’m an ML and I live in a capitalist country. Further, liberals are absolutely worse than anarchists.
I’ll stand corrected on the anarchist comment. But if one lives in a capitalist country, one inevitably supports capitalism, right? Even if it’s against their will.
This sounds more and more like Original Sin.
Existing within capitalism does not mean you cannot work to overthrow it and must ideologically support it by espousing liberal talking points.
Where are progressives on that scale? Oh, and do fascists, I definitely want to know how a fascist stacks up against a liberal!
The formula for a fascist is liberal plus time, multiplied by war
If you’re not anti capitalist and anti bourgeois democracy even if you’re “progressive” you’re just a flavour of liberal. Fascists are obviously worse than liberals although they tend to agree on a surprising amount of things when push comes to shove unfortunately. Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds is a widespread phrase for a reason.
“Progressive” doesn’t really mean anything beyond “left of establishment democrats.” They range from liberal to socialist. Fascists are a twin of liberalism, worse but fundamentally connected.
Profoundly wrong statement.
First because that’s not how Marxist-Leninists use the word ‘liberal’, that’s a definition you just made up while ignoring decades of literature. Second, because it implies that is not what the word actually means to literally everyone, not just Leninists or even just socialists, everywhere on the planet with the exception of the US liberal duopoly.
Third, because it implies people are calling you a liberal because of your instance, and not because of your shit takes.
The ML usage of the term liberal comes from Classical Liberalism, right? Please correct me.
Also I hate how y’all think I’m personally evil because I haven’t Read Theory. Y’all are my first exposure to MLs and I don’t have any control over what my society has taught me. (I’m not defending what my society has taught me, I’ve been deconstructing for a long time and not stopping.)
Is naivete a sin?
Is naivete a sin?
No investigation no right to speak is a core part of MarxistLeninist thought as it has evolved. Naivete is not “a sin” but if you haven’t researched a topic you shouldn’t speak on it.
As Chairman Mao put it:
Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn’t that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak? Quite a few comrades always keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense, and for a Communist that is disgraceful. How can a Communist keep his eyes shut and talk nonsense?
It won’t do!
It won’t do!
You must investigate!
You must not talk nonsense!
China’s social credit score system exists because after their rapid urbanization the business community started complaining that they needed a way to know who can be trusted to pay back loans. At the same time the cities were full of people who were used to knowing all their neighbors and were now surrounded by strangers that they didn’t trust. The Chinese government framed both of these problems as the same thing - a crisis of trust - and presented the social credit score as the solution. It was just a copy of the United States’ credit score system but dressed up in socialist buzzwords to make it more palatable to the people, so it was really just meant to solve the first problem while pretending to solve the latter. The “social” aspects of the social credit score (subtracting points when someone commits a crime, public disturbance, etc.) are inconsistently applied across various localities and practically vestigial, most Chinese are not even aware that they exist. It’s ironic that this socialist coat of paint on one of the most capitalistic elements in the Chinese economy makes Americans think it’s dystopian, while in reality the most dystopian parts of it are the ways that it’s identical to our credit system.
That is pretty wild. I didn’t know any of this … I just thought “communist dystopia is dystopian”. The fact that you can take a hit to the credit score for engaging in protests and demonstrations is still scary … no one show this to Republicans.
I cannot emphasize enough how much air would be sucked out of our propaganda overnight if china just fucking uncensored the internet and truly protected freedom of speech and information.
Just orientalist vibes, no sources in sight.
Yea, China monitors a billion people in their country and assigns them a score if a citizen walks on the sidewalk correctly /s
Yea, China monitors a billion people in their country
Correct, and those abroad too.
I know this because a US government-funded “independent” think tank told me so.
You know the stories of secret overseas Chinese police stations were fake news, right?
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
It’s very hard to prove a negative, especially to people who want to believe, thanks to over a century of anticommunist propaganda. The burden of proof ought to be on those making claims of secret foreign police stations on their soil, an extraordinary claim. All those articles are trash and have no real evidence. And they don’t need any, because almost no Westerners demand any, because the narrative aligns with their preconception of communist states as cartoonishly evil.
deleted by creator
Inb4 they drop the zionist media bias fact “checker” link 😂
assigns them a score if a citizen walks on the sidewalk correctly
Funny story about Jaywalking
The automobile lobby in the US took up the cause of labeling and scorning jaywalkers in the 1910s and early 1920s. In 1912, for instance, Popular Mechanics magazine reported that the term was current in Kansas City: “The city pedestrian who cares not for traffic regulations at street corners, but strays all over the street, crossing in the middle of the block, or attempting to save time by choosing a diagonal route across a street intersection instead of adhering to the regular crossing, is designated as a ‘jay walker,’ in Kansas City.”
In 1915, when New York City’s police commissioner Arthur Woods sought to apply the word “jaywalker” to anyone who crossed the street at mid-block, the New York Times protested, calling it “highly opprobrious” and “a truly shocking name.”
Originally in the US, the legal rule was that “all persons have an equal right in the highway, and that in exercising the right each shall take due care not to injure other users of the way”. In time, however, streets became the province of vehicular traffic, both practically and legally.
Anyway, enjoy your hyper-criminalized car culture hellscape while making spooky fingers about Evil Foreign Country.
The Chinese credit system is western propaganda there is nothing like it as described in western media.
China IS authoritarian.
Some gringo in the comments: “Something something Uyghurs, something something mass surveillance, winnie poo”
The only muslim people they suddenly “pretend” to care about because their media hides the fact that they are muslim.
Muslims everywhere else are fair game.
Liberals and real actual gaza genocide: 🥱
Liberals and fake Uyghur genocide: Real shit
“fake” Uyghur genocide, wow.
Bruh it’s .ml get out there is no reasoning with these people China is utopia that can do no wrong. They don’t want to have meaningful discussions in here its a big circlejerk for Stalin and Mao and submitting to authority. They are not revolutionaries and they did not get to this point in their lives by using actual logic
So not accepting exaggerated narratives means China is a utopia? Why do people rarely offer ordinary, policy-level criticism? There is plenty of it, but discussion often defaults to cartoonish claims instead of routine institutional analysis.
Where is the discussion of the hukou household registration system and its trade-offs?
Where is the discussion of local government reliance on land-use financing?
Where is the discussion of provincial policy experimentation and uneven implementation?
Where is the discussion of state-owned enterprises and their structural advantages and drawbacks?
Where is the discussion of demographic policy after the one-child era?
Where is the discussion of regional inequality between coastal and interior provinces?
Where is the discussion of the property sector’s role in household wealth and local budgets?
Where is the discussion of debt accumulation among provincial financing vehicles?
Where is the discussion of administrative campaign-style governance and its policy side effects?
Where is the discussion of bureaucratic incentives within the cadre evaluation system?
Where is the discussion of industrial policy prioritization and capital allocation?
Where is the discussion of urban planning constraints produced by internal migration controls?
Where is the discussion of education access differences tied to household registration?
Where is the discussion of long-term pension sustainability in an aging population?
I know where they are, in China because none of you know enough about China to have a proper discussion on any of these. All you know is spouting ridiculous talking points.
China isn’t a utopia, and does have problems. China’s problems are real, though, not invented, so discussion of China’s issues requires drawing a line between fact and fiction.
It is? Their is no evidence. It’s a fabrication invented by a German evangelical on a self proclaimed “mission from god” to destroy communism.
No, it isnt. We have geographic evidence as well as countless testimonies of the Uyghur people.
For some reason when it comes to China/Uyghur muslims, people have no issue dismissing their genocide and thinking it’s okay.
There is no genocide of Uyghurs. Uyghur genocide atrocity propaganda akin to claiming that there’s “white genocide” in South Africa, Christian genocide in Nigeria, or that Hamas sexually assaulted babies in Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.
In the case of Xinjiang, the area is crucial in the Belt and Road Initiative, so the west backed sepratist groups in order to destabilize the region. China responded with vocational programs and de-radicalization efforts, which the west then twisted into claims of “genocide.” Nevermind that the west responds to seperatism with mass violence, and thus re-education programs focused on rehabilitation are far more humane, the tool was used both for outright violence by the west into a useful narrative to feed its own citizens.
The best and most comprehensive resource I have seen so far is Qiao Collective’s Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation. Qiao Collective is explicitly pro-PRC, but this is an extremely comprehensive write-up of the entire background of the events, the timeline of reports, and real and fake claims.
I also recommend reading the UN report and China’s response to it. These are the most relevant accusations and responses without delving into straight up fantasy like Adrian Zenz, professional propagandist for the Victims of Communism Foundation, does.
Tourists do go to Xinjiang all the time as well. You can watch videos like this one on YouTube, though it obviously isn’t going to be a comprehensive view of a complex situation like this.
I was in Urumqi recently enough and I can tell you this they are some of the most pro government people I have ever talked with lmao they love that ETIM was kicked out.
You have gusano testimony from the likes of Rushan Abbas (Guantanamo bay torturer) It’s not real.
Also tell me about this geographic evidence? Pictures of prisons that you decided are camps because we’re evil scary Chinese people?
I never said “you’re evil scary Chinese people”. The Chinese state however, is another story (authoritarian— but I know you’re apathetic towards authoritarianism). I realize now that this may be evoking some sort of nationalistic reaction out of you, though.
I didn’t “decide”— like I said, independent journalists and satellite imaging. And no, it’s not reducible to “Western evil scary propaganda” like you’re making it out to be.
The Chinese state that has 95+% support from the population and is made up of a representative of Chinese people.
White people decided we’re evil and you just go along with it without any investigation because you’re racist and it confirms your biases
authoritarian— but I know you’re apathetic towards authoritarianism
All governments/states are authoritarian. That is their nature. No government is excluded from this.
The difference with some governments over others is who wields that authority: the majority of working class people, or the minority of capitalist class people.
I’d prefer to live in a state that advocates for my best interests as a working class individual rather than submit to capitalists that want to extract everything that I’m worth for themselves and hoard for no good reason.
Something something
Tibetan monk sentenced to six years in prison for teaching Tibetan language
https://phayul.com/tibetan-monk-sentenced-to-six-years-in-prison-for-teaching-tibetan-language/
Lmao, Tibetan is literally taught in schools in Tibet and is the official language of Tibet Autonomous Region. These obscure propaganda articles hiding the Truth are hilarious! 😂
