623
"China is AuThORItAriAN!" - Liberals (europe.pub)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
451 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 34 points 6 months ago (32 children)

Some gringo in the comments: "Something something Uyghurs, something something mass surveillance, winnie poo"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 32 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 29 points 6 months ago (28 children)

    Liberals and real actual gaza genocide: 🥱

    Liberals and fake Uyghur genocide: Real shit

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
    •
  • [+] -8 points 6 months ago (27 children)

    "fake" Uyghur genocide, wow.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 6 months ago (23 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
    •
  • [+] -11 points 6 months ago* (22 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago (20 children)

    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?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 6 months ago (19 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago (17 children)

    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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [+] -13 points 6 months ago (16 children)

    Ah yes because government-manufactured numbers hold value— you must think Russia is a democracy too, no?

    Oh, and now I'm racist. Great. Critiquing a state means I'm racist. Logical.

    I have nothing against Chinese people. If you're defending things like suppression, I don't care what colour you are, I don't like that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Ah yes because government-manufactured numbers hold value— you must think Russia is a democracy too, no?

    Strawman. Also more racism.

    You are a racist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago (12 children)

    Western organizations have found that over 90% of the population approve the government, which is shown to be consistent and accurate. This isn't coming from the government, but from western orgs directly asking Chinese people. Further, despite evidence that the government of China isn't lying about public ownership being principle, and the transparent form of democracy we can view, you still don't trust the government's claims either!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [+] -13 points 6 months ago (11 children)

    Dictatorships that operate regardless of the will of the people such as Russia also "report high rates of approval".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago (10 children)

    This is just phrasemongering on your part. The PRC is a democracy that operates based on consultative democracy, and these numbers are coming from western orgs. Your refusal to even accept western views on China points to an underlying dogmatism in your viewpoint that can only be explained by illogical foundations, ie chauvanism. I suggest you either bring facts and numbers, or accept that the CPC has high approval rates, else you're just being chauvanistic.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 6 months ago (9 children)

    You didn't engage with my argument, so I won't with yours either.

    Let's call it phrasemongering.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    I did engage with your point, we aren't talking about a dictatorship but a democratically run country, and not numbers gathered by the country itself but by western, hostile countries. Your analogy does not compare, western orgs have consistently found high approval rates. Why?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 6 months ago (7 children)

    Whether or not the country calls itself democratic isnt relevant.

    Engage with this: why does Russia have high approval rates?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    Russia's approval rates are largely self-reported, unlike China's which are reported by tons of western organizations. These are not equal situations. Further, China doesn't merely call itself democratic, it is democratic.

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    It passes in terms of what democracies are in practice but the political suppression, surveillance, and censorship that China is known for its anything but democratic.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Why should capitalists be allowed in the democratic processes of a socialist state? True democracy means rule by the people, not a privledged class.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    That's not what I said. Under the veneer of censoring capitalism, you allow broader censorship.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Censorship is not a blanket thing, it's specifically targetting misinformation, pro-capitalist speech, and that which undermines socialism. The working classes use it to silence capitalists.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    You're saying that, why should I believe that's actually the case?

    Censorship is always done with some sort of "positive" narrative tied to it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago

    Because it's the reason censorship is used. People don't censor for fun, but to protect the system. China is socialist and run by the working classes, it would not have the support it does if it was brutally oppressing them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    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 as well as (especially) China's response to it, which eclipses it in size and detail.These are the most relevant accusations and responses without delving into straight up fantasy like Adrian Zenz, Christian nationalist and professional propagandist for the Victims of Communism Foundation, does. Zenz' work has been thoroughly discredited, yet is supported by western media for its utility in fearmongering. An example is lying about 8.7% of new IUDs as 80%, to back up claims of "forced sterilization," from this chart:

    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. Has there been mistreatment? Almost certainly to some degree, in a campaign as large as this. Is it genocide, be it cultural or outright? No, Uyghur culture is preserved and there are no mass killings.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -7 points 6 months ago (2 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent