• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      It really hit the right balance, it prompted discussion in what is (hopefully) a productive manner by highlighting mass support for violence against billionaires compared to the actions of AES states. Hopefully people start reading Marx after this.

    • LesserAbe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      The original was funny to me because people thought the second guy was fine when the reality would be if a woman is calling human resources there’s probably something there. It’s a joke told from the perspective of someone who’s unable to see anything wrong and is only representing their side of the story. So I thought this was a riff on that idea, and viewed in that light this version is funny too.

    • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Oppressing the owners of capital is good, actually. If you don’t do it you end up like the US where everyone has to pay them for everything all the time and the police is only there to prevent you from doing anything about it.

          • ReakDuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            Here a lot of articles.

            https://duckduckgo.com/?q=china+jails+islamic+people&t=fpas&ia=web

            I had my source from a Video a long time ago where even Chinese Muslims were intervied about this in what they need to flee from. The topic also had Gay people needing to go through therapy because Gayness is a sickmess says china… how stupid

            But I assume its pointless to share as you see probably everything as Propaganda cuz China is glory or smth. Idk. You can explain your viewpoint if you want. It can be neutral too

            • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 days ago

              You’ve owned the tankies by posting a search link that brings up articles from US and anglophone state media sources, like CNN, BBC.

              The majority of the world disagrees with them, most notably the Muslim world, who had decades of lies from those sources defending the US bombing of their countries.

        • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          Brother the US has ONE FIFTH of the world’s inmates (in dire conditions that provide slave labor) despite having less than 5% of the world population.

          If y’all didn’t thoughtlessly and immediately internalize whatever outlandish shit your media tells you about the yellow peril you’d be envious of their living standards and, honestly? Their political freedom too.

          That’s the point.

          • ReakDuck@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 days ago

            Cool for you that America does bad things. I really am confused about that argument because I never mentioned america and has nothing to do that china literally puts Gay people under pressure with medicine to cure them or put Islamic people into jail for being islamic and not wanting to convert. There are many stupid reaosons. But I never said America is better or smth. Thats what I interpret from your message/argument. Why do you think that the earth consists of only America? Thats the last country I wanna think of.

            • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 days ago

              Xinjiang is almost half muslim and they have like 200 mosques there, you can go visit them 🤡 there was a push for deradicalization when the CIA did as CIA does and started sponsoring terror attacks, and China, instead of responding with bombings, provided education and vocational training. The result has been zero terrorist attacks since 2019, compared to 37 attacks in 2014 alone. I mention America because that’s unequivocally the only source of this nonsense, although they launder the State Department propaganda through VoC, ASPI (the only “primary sources” ever cited, such as they are) and several other proxy organizations with funding provided by NED and the military industrial complex. The Arab League and the United Nations have sent delegations to examine the claims and found them unsustained, the Arab League congratulated China as a role model in the fight against terrorism.

              The UN delegation, by the way, was halted by America several times because they knew they wouldn’t find jack shit, and they didn’t think people would be stupid enough to keep saying it once it had been proven false.

              Real convenient that you don’t want to think of America tho, but we’re talking about an American CEO that got killed by an American and arrested by American cops for doing a desperate act of self defense.

      • balderdash@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        By this logic, a monarchy that keeps the aristocracy in line is better than the US democracy. A benevolent dictator is still a dictator.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          In what manner is Xi a dictator? The fact that he has been reelected democratically and hasn’t lost to someone else?

              • balderdash@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                8 days ago

                The Communist Party is based in the Leninist principle of “democratic centralism”. This means “debate within the party, unity in action”. It is meant to make the party more powerful by allowing dissent and debates within the party, but when it comes to taking action, all members are expected to follow the consensus even if they disagreed with it.

                Since China’s Congress is primarily members of the Communist Party, this means that the decision of the president ultimately originates in the Communist Party itself. After they reach a consensus, the whole party will vote for that consensus in the Congress. While there technically are smaller parties in China’s Congress, they act more as advisors, since it is not practically possible for them to overturn the vote, since the CPC always votes in unity.

                Formally, China’s president is elected by the Congress. But the decision of who to elect largely comes back to the CPC itself before they come to a consensus. So the final decision largely originates in the Politburo and the Central Committee.

                The president in China is harder to shift on a dime than like in the US. The president is not elected by a nation-wide vote but by the Congress itself. To change who the Congress elects, you have to change the opinions of the largest party in that Congress, you have to change the opinions of the CPC


                Xi is not technically a dictator in the same way that Putin is not technically a dictator. He is in control of a governing body that could replace him on paper, but never will. And he has dictatorial powers without real checks/balances. And, to return to my original point, it may appear that this system is fine if it produces a good result, but the power of the government should come from the will of the people.

          • balderdash@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 days ago

            Next you’ll tell me Putin took justified military action. Tankies are out in full force today

        • SoulWager@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          The problem with a benevolent dictator is that they die eventually, and are replaced by a non-benevolent dictator, or a civil war, or both. Unfortunately it looks like the US democracy might have the same outcome.

      • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        Except Xi Jinping is not oppressing owners of capital. China has lots of oligarchs that in some ways have a tighter grip on society than their western counterparts. He’s oppressing people that are “inconvenient” to him.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago
          1. Quantity of bourgeoisie is not an indication of who runs the country or which is primary, public or private property

          2. China has the second biggest population in the world, period.

          The PRC saw what happened when you cracked down too hard on wealth inequality too early in the USSR, there was significant brain drain and people took what they could elsewhere. This eventually led to decreased growth and contributed to collapse. The PRC instead allows billionaires (so long as they don’t commit crimes), and as a consequnce they now have the largest economy by PPP and second largest by GDP. It’s a “boiling the frog” approach.

          • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            8 days ago

            And capitalists have no choice but to partake now, even western companies are tripping over themselves to set up shop in China because that’s the biggest market now that the leeches have bled the US population almost dry and destroyed their supply chains. They literally can’t compete, unless they invest and build in China.

            They’re selling them the rope, and that’s why the US has gotten progressively more rabid against the CPC.

          • anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 days ago

            They also have more millionaires per capita than Countries like Russia, but I focused on total number because a country that actually oppressed capital owners wouldn’t have any billionaires.

            • Sop@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 days ago

              China’s top 1% income share is lower than US and Russia. Top 10% income share is also lower in China.

  • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    Working class executing CEOs that work against them

    Ruling class executing CEOs who don’t work for them

    Slight difference

    • within_epsilon@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      Absolutely. Power is the difference. Vertical power structures all look the same. Call it communism, but those at the bottom are still ruled by those at the top. Instead give me some of that horizontal, bottom up power. No gods, no masters.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      That’s an anti-Marxist view of class. What is the “ruling class” you speak of in the PRC? Government isn’t class, but an extension of the class in power, so which class is in power?

      • 小莱卡@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        the ruling class in china is the working class since its a dictatorship of the proletariat. So commentor is kinda right, tho im sure commentor doesn’t mean it that way.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          Yep, that’s why I framed my question in that manner. If they said bourgeoisie, I would point out how that’s wrong, if they said Proletarian, I would ask why that’s bad, if they said some third class I’d show how that’s anti-Marxist.

          • Windex007@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 days ago

            My point is you had no point. You responded to a FANTASTIC explanation of the difference by splitting hairs on what by your definition qualifies as a class.

            Instead of addressing the argument, you just threw a semantics argument, which I maintain is the terminally online version of pocket sand.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 days ago

              I addressed it entirely. The Proletariat executing Billionaires who go against the proletariat is perfectly in line with Marx and his concept of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. The CPC has 96 million members, it isn’t a distinct class, it represents the will of the people and as such has a higher than 95% approval rate. Their implication is that the CPC is some third ruling class, and not the instrument of proletarian supremacy, which is why I corrected it.

              Your response doesn’t address any of how I analyzed their argument, by insisting I am “splitting hairs” by pointing out how the class dynamics of a bourgeois state and a proletarian state are fundamentally different, and that difference is that the proletarian state represents the real will of the people while the bourgeois state does not.

              • Windex007@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                8 days ago

                This is where I think the conversations always break down on ml.

                You fervently assert things like a 95% approval rating while selectively ignoring the “social credit” system that punishes people who don’t approve. You use large party employment to justify some kind of perfect overlap between the proletariat and the government. Where do you think the real decision making is done? Do you think it isn’t a tiny fraction of party elite? How would you view these things through the lens of manufactured consent?

                I don’t think it’s any better in a western capitalist system, but I’m not going to deceive myself into thinking that china is running fundamentally differently than any western oligarchy.

                • davel@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  8 days ago

                  I’m not going to deceive myself into thinking that china is running fundamentally differently than any western oligarchy.

                  You’re choosing to continue deceiving yourself that China is not fundamentally different from any western oligarchy, got it.

                • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 days ago

                  The “social credit system” was made to hold financial and privately-run institutions to account, and prevent companies and organizations from committing fraud and polluting the environment. Even US capitalist mouthpieces like foreign policy agree with this.

                  The government does assign universal social credit codes to companies and organizations, which they use as an ID number for registration, tax payments, and other activities, while all individuals have a national ID number. The existing social credit blacklists use these numbers, as do almost all activities in China. But these codes are not scores or rankings. Enterprises and professionals in various sectors may be graded or ranked, sometimes by industry associations, for specific regulatory purposes like restaurant sanitation. However, the social credit system does not itself produce scores, grades, or assessments of “good” or “bad” social credit. Instead, individuals or companies are blacklisted for specific, relatively serious offenses like fraud and excessive pollution that would generally be offenses anywhere. To be sure, China does regulate speech, association, and other civil rights in ways that many disagree with, and the use of the social credit system to further curtail such rights deserves monitoring.

                  These are basic things the US used to do in the 1950s, but now stopped any pretense of doing. Any regulation against business is considered “authoritarian” now.

                  Meanwhile in the US, having a bad credit score can prevent you from buying a car, house, or even renting an apartment.

                  China uses these scores to hold financial institutions to account, while the US uses scores to prevent ordinary citizens from getting housing. One country is a dictatorship of the proletariat, the other a dictatorship of capital.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  8 days ago

                  It’s more that liberals like yourself directly ignoring facts and statistics while blindly repeating vague and unsourced claims of “China Bad,” because it lets you remain comfortable in your pre-existing worldview. Communists do not have such luxury, which is why they seemingly always have endless sources on hand. In your comment here, as an example, you discredit the CPC’s approval with no source. However, if we ask Harvard themselves about the results of their study, they say “We find that first, since the start of the survey in 2003, Chinese citizen satisfaction with government has increased virtually across the board. From the impact of broad national policies to the conduct of local town officials, Chinese citizens rate the government as more capable and effective than ever before. Interestingly, more marginalized groups in poorer, inland regions are actually comparatively more likely to report increases in satisfaction. Second, the attitudes of Chinese citizens appear to respond (both positively and negatively) to real changes in their material well-being, which suggests that support could be undermined by the twin challenges of declining economic growth and a deteriorating natural environment.” This directly goes against your claims of “social credit” preventing this, moreover the “Orwellian Social Credit System” you hint at doesn’t even exist, at least not in the manner you imply it does.

                  You are directly decieving yourself because you license yourself to. If you actually looked at real sources and didn’t reject them reflexively, while accepting bourgeois media at face value, you’d sit much closer to where I do. You should read False Witnesses and Masses, Elites, and Rebels: The Theory of “Brainwashing.” Both are excellent examples of why people don’t change their minds when seeing indisputable evidence, they willingly go along with narratives that they find more comfortable. It explains the outright anger liberals express when anticommunism is debunked. That doesn’t mean Communists don’t do the same thing, but as we live in a liberal dominated west (most likely, assuming demographics) this happens to a much lesser extent because liberalism is that which supplies these “licenses” to go along, while Communism requires hard work to begin to accept. This explains the mountains of sources Communists keep on hand, and the lack thereof from liberals who argue from happenstance and vibes.

            • comfy@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              You responded to a FANTASTIC explanation of the difference by splitting hairs on what by your definition qualifies as a class.

              A fantastic explanation? It literally isn’t an explanation, it’s a comparison of two statements. Which is fine, and so is the critique of those statements to examine their perceived contradictions.

              From the perspective of the CPC and Marxist-Leninist theory, their ruling party represents the working class, just like our ruling parties represent the owner class of CEOs. [wikipedia page: DotP] Obviously that’s a contested claim which not even all Marxists will agree with, but it’s far from splitting hairs. It’s the basic foundation of the comparison, the implicit claim that one is a working class act and the other is not.

              • Windex007@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 days ago

                This is the most concise rebuttal and I think you’ve highlighted well where the root of the perceived discord lies.

                If one accepts that the CPC represents the working class, then the critique of the unfair comparison via the meme would be viewed as legitimate.

                If one contests the original assertion, then it does not. To them, Xi memeing a CEO would look to them more like Musk offing Altman.

      • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        It’s the latter part of “no god’s no masters”

        I’m sorry if I’ve insulted Marxist purity

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      There is never a case of a working class party conquering political power, that hasn’t been demonized by western anti-communist society.

      When the US and its media tells you that the leaders China or Cuba or Vietnam are just “dictators”, why do you believe them?

  • Azzu@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    It is indeed possible for a person/entity to do a good thing and a bad thing. Who would’ve guessed, it’s actually incredibly likely. I’m sure Luigi was no angel and can be criticized about many things, though he likely didn’t have the power to perform systematic human rights transgressions.

  • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    I see people ask “what tankie shit” quite often

    Thank you for the violently clear example to link to you blind idiot

  • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    All this comment section proves is that if the only thing that changed was that Thompson was a Chinese healthcare CEO called Zhao Qiang and got clapped by the government libs would be calling him a working class hero and a martyr like the fucking NYT.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        I have not seen a single Marxist make this claim. Deng wasn’t pro-billionaire, but wished to return to a Marxist analysis of the PRC’s economy. It had taken on an ultraleft character and was unstable, they had socialized more than they should have with their level of productive forces, and have consistently been working their way back to that level of socialization now that the Socialist Market Economy has proven wildly successful. Without doing so, extreme poverty could not have been eradicated like it has been.

    • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      Lmao. There’s a Joe McCarthy inside every gringo. Nice thought terminating cliche tho.

        • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          One comment later, the just demonized tankies turn into greats.

          Don’t expect any consistency from anti-communists.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          No, you would have called them tankies. These people are comrades, and liberals love stealing their valor. Castro, a person you here refer to as a “great,” said

          "Xi Jinping is one of the strongest and most capable revolutionary leaders I have met in my life. I think China is a socialist country, and Vietnam is a socialist nation as well. And they insist that they have introduced all the necessary reforms in order to motivate national development and to continue seeking the objectives of socialism.

          There are no fully pure regimes or systems. In Cuba, for instance, we have many forms of private property. We have hundreds of thousands of farm owners. In some cases they own up to 110 acres. In Europe they would be considered large landholders. Practically all Cubans own their own home and, what is more, we welcome foreign investment.

          But that does not mean that Cuba has stopped being socialist."

          Don’t try to absolve them of their words and turn them into toothless liberals for you to celebrate, either condemn them honestly or uphold them honestly.

  • x00z@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    The difference is whether or not the CEO is working against the people or against the government.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Over 95% of people support the CPC, so it’s fair to say that the people approve of the way the CPC is handling billionaires that are highly corrupt or otherwise guilty of mass crimes. If we ask Harvard themselves about the results of their study, they say “We find that first, since the start of the survey in 2003, Chinese citizen satisfaction with government has increased virtually across the board. From the impact of broad national policies to the conduct of local town officials, Chinese citizens rate the government as more capable and effective than ever before. Interestingly, more marginalized groups in poorer, inland regions are actually comparatively more likely to report increases in satisfaction. Second, the attitudes of Chinese citizens appear to respond (both positively and negatively) to real changes in their material well-being, which suggests that support could be undermined by the twin challenges of declining economic growth and a deteriorating natural environment.” This directly goes against claims of “social credit” preventing this, moreover the “Orwellian Social Credit System” hinted at doesn’t even exist, at least not in the manner most think it does. Even more overtly, they state "Although state censorship and propaganda are widespread, our survey reveals that citizen perceptions of governmental performance respond most to real, measurable changes in individuals’ material well-being."

        • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 days ago

          Ah, yeah, true democracy is when everyone fucking hates congress, the supreme court, the president, their senator, their cops and their prosecutors, but they have no choice but to accept them.

          Y’all get to be sassy on Twitter tho, good for you lmao

          • Traister101@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 days ago

            I have never and will continue to never use Twitter. It was a shit hole long before Eron Musk bought it and made it a haven for terminally online Neo Natzis. I love how the immediate reaction whenever anybody says something slightly not in favor of the CCP you tankies do this kinda stuff lmao. Believe it or not people can believe things simultaneously, like maybe CCP is not great and also US not amazing?

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          It isn’t a dictatorship, source on it being one please? Secondly, I outright bolded where the western study outlined that the biggest factor in approval was the real material improvements in their lives. Why do you think you know more about a country than the billions that live there?

          • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 days ago

            You’re wasting your time, if living in that shit hole and having to pay out the ass whenever their bank, insurance, landlord, ISP, or utility company wants to pad out their margins while their politicians get bribed by them isn’t enough to convince them that they’re the ones living in a dictatorship, nothing short of total societal collapse will.

        • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 days ago

          They literally linked you a study from harvard, because we know you white supremacists consider any non-western source as being inferior, and would reject them out of hand.

  • carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    One isn’t a corrupt dictator killing or imprisoning anyone who complains about him. If you think the little guy isn’t getting hurt in China I want the drugs you’re on.

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      What are you talking about. Hitler and the nazis were just as much about empowering corporations and suppressing workers movements, as the US is.

      • Grapho@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        But if libs don’t say stupid shit they have tp not say anything and just read. This is a human rights violation.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Equating Communism with fascism is false thinking, because it ignores the real classes served by each and therefore the direction of power and the consequences of their implementation. Communism has always corresponded with dramatic working class improvements while fascism has served the bourgeoisie. I highly recommend Blackshirts and Reds.