- cross-posted to:
- leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- cross-posted to:
- leftymemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
On May 5th, 1818, Karl Marx, hero of the international proletatiat, was born. His revolution of Socialist theory reverberates throughout the world carries on to this day, in increasing magnitude. Every passing day, he is vindicated. His analysis of Capitalism, development of the theory of Scientific Socialism, and advancements on dialectics to become Dialectical Materialism, have all played a key role in the past century, and have remained ever-more relevant throughout.
He didn’t always rock his famous beard, when he was younger he was clean shaven!
Some significant works:
Economic & Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844
The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte
Critique of the Gotha Programme
Manifesto of the Communist Party (along with Engels)
And, of course, Capital Vol I-III
Interested in Marxism-Leninism, but don’t know where to start? Check out my “Read Theory, Darn it!” introductory reading list!
As Marx’s favorite maxim goes, “Nihil humani a me alienum puto [Nothing human is alien to me]”
I love memes and gaming, same with Marxist-Leninist theory, same with space, science, and technology. Connecting to others with shared culture is part of what makes us human.
@Cowbee @Cypher Marxist-Leninist theory is fine. Theoretically the concepts of communal ownership and resources sharing is a laudable one. Too bad the only example of this concept actually working is Star Trek. The instances when it’s been tried in the real world, ended in authortarainism and/or collapse.
All countries are “authoritarian,” what matters most is which class is in control and thus exerting its authority. In Capitalist society, that class is the Bourgeoisie, a tiny minority of society. In Socialism, that class is the Proletariat, the majority of society. Countries like the PRC are labeled “authoritarian” not due to how the people themselves feel, but because Capital is limited by the government. Even if over 90% of Chinese citizens support the CPC, western media slanders the system as “authoritarian” because their corporate masters can’t move as they please in Chinese markets.
Countries like the PRC are labeled authoritarian because they do not provide basic human rights such as freedom of speech.
I will quote exclusively from your own source you have linked
You were accurate about the satisfaction rate towards Beijing.
Why do they suggest this rate is so high?
What about local government approval rates?
That was a very interesting read, thank you for linking it but I don’t think it says what you think it says.
The reason I include it as a source is because it’s conducted by a group hostile to the CPC and interested in undermining it. The opinions of those gathering the data are already hostile to the system, yet the data absolutely points in favor of popular support. Further, the 11.3% for “very satisfied” doesn’t translate to all satisfied, only those very satisfied. The PRC is a rapidly improving country.
China does have freedom of speech. They exert more control over what corporations and billionaires can say, but they are more or less similar in speech levels to other countries. Again, the reason China is labeled “authoritarian” by the Western Media is because their corporate owners cannot do as they please. They want to foster hostility towards China among the public by exclusively showing a one-sided point of view that aligns perfectly with the views of their owners.
In conclusion, my source says exactly what I said it does. It’s reliable in that we can trust the positives admitted from someone overall hostile.
No they absolutely do not. Free speech isnt simply the claim that “we have free speech” but it is ensuring that the principles of free speech, especially the freedom to criticize, are available for all citizens.
I searched for actual Chinese law to cite for this part, let me know if i made any mistakes but this is what I found:
https://www.cecc.gov/international-agreements-and-domestic-legislation-affecting-freedom-of-expression#criminallaw
I don’t want to be close minded to new info, but when you throw out “western media” the way you are it makes me feel like you’re trying to gaslight me.
China is a state. No state power is a flawless perfect angel.
The West has a lot of flaws, but one idea it had that is a good one is the idea of limiting the power of the state, and having a strong bill of rights/Constitution which guarantees rights.
This doesn’t prevent it from being authoritarian, we can point to clear violations of civil liberties like the students being kidnapped off the streets and disappeared to an El Salvadoran death camp.
If I was unable to recognize that as authoritarian I think you’d rightfully decide this conversation is a non starter and I’m just too far gone.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/01/asia/china-students-peking-university-intl
So am I propagandized to? Was this story (and many more like it I could find and bring up) completely made up?
Or can we both agree stuff like this isn’t great and work towards a future where we prevent the abduction of students in both spheres of the world.
Forget the Western Media. I am telling you they are authoritarian. I don’t do business with them, I am instead using objective standards of what actions an individual should be able to freely choose without fear of reprisal from their government.
The average citizen is in danger of being arrested over posting speech to social media (yes the UK and Australia are authoritarian for doing the same thing, that’s how objective standards should work).
They’re in danger of being arrested for protesting their government, or for organizing their labor. The only correct channel of protest is going through the local government with the abysmally poor approval rate you cited.
What? How does that make anything any more or less reliable?
You can’t just cherry pick positives out of a negative bias and assume it cancels out.
A study done by someone not hostile would be more reliable. That’s what I would have tried to link, but I guess the source you linked explains China’s strict censorship makes it difficult to do an objective opinion poll.
Those are all basic laws that apply to businesses, not random citizens. A Socialist State controlling the media influence of private individuals is straight from Karl Marx. Even the specific law on individuals overwhelmingly applies to public figures and celebrities, not random citizens.
I never said China is “perfect.” I said it is demonized as “authoritarian” by Western Media because the owners in Western Media can’t do as they please in Chinese markets. I’m not “gaslighting” you by disagreeing with your conclusions.
Secondly, Western States aren’t limited. They are extremely strong, the US has hundreds of millitary bases all over the world (China has less than 10 foreign millitary bases). The Bill of Rights and Constitution also don’t serve the people. What they do serve is providing freedom for Capital owners to plunder and profit as they please, and the State is under their control.
My point is that “authoritarianism” is a meaningless buzzword. All states exert authority, what matters most is which clads is in control and thus exerting its authority. In the West, that is the capitalist class, in China, it’s the working class. Both are “authoritarian,” in that sense, as all states are, but are fundamentally different in character, backed by why China has such high approval rates and the US has such low approval rates.
As for that one particular CNN article, I question it highly. Either the quality or quantity of the event is highly distorted, or important facts are obscured. This is the standard play, CNN is a propaganda outlet and the US has approved 1.6 billion dollars exclusively for anti-PRC propaganda.
You can absolutely organize, but not in a manner that goes against the public good. Private interests use such mechanisms to oppose the system that is overwhelmingly popular. The CPC frequently supports worker strikes and protests against corrupt businesses.
Further, you again pretend “very satisfied” is the same as overall approval. You’re lying. The actual approval rate at the Township level is 70.2%, which you either think is “abysmally low,” or are intentionally trying to twist very satisfied into satisfied in general, which is coincidentally a propaganda tactic used by Western Media, focusing on one aspect and omitting the more important data. Here’s the actual table:
Yes, a study by a theoretical “neutral” party would be most accurate. It’s likely the approval rate is actually higher than the hostile poll shows. By showing that even someone hostile must admit the high approval rates, other, less hostile polls showing the same or better figures are vindicated.
Sorry missed this one part.
Yeah in a vacuum I definitely disagree with this, but to some extent it feels somewhat similar to the usage of chemical weapons in WWI.
If one side is gonna use it, it’s just the world we live in that everyone is going to try to use it.
We act more or less peaceful face to face, only choosing to fight each other through proxy wars, but Israel, the US, China, Russia… everyone appears to be actively fighting an information war online, hacking and spying on everyone else with no remorse.
It seems at this point the only way to stop it would be to come to international agreement it’s off the limit for everyone and jointly sanction whoever is caught doing it, but I think we all know that’s never going to happen.
The information war is simply bad for democracies with freedom of speech and just not bad at all for authoritarian governments who censor vast swathes of the information their citizens have access to.
https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-naval-academy-speech-china-democracy-warning-1710966
Considering international systems are currently dominated by the US Empire, any agreement, no matter how good it sounds, is going to be passed for the benefit of maintainin that Empire. Considering the people of China love their system despite feeling it has a lot of work to be done, and the people of the US hate its own system, there is a clear difference in effectiveness.
As for Joe Biden’s deliberate misquoting of Xi Jinping, you need to realize what Xi actually said. It’s no surprise that a genocidal Imperialist like Joe Biden would lie, but to take his lie at face value, rather than Xi’s own words on the subject and the people of China who view their system as democratic at higher rates than US citizens, is silly.
Xi was criticizing the Western, liberal conception of democracy, not democracy in general. Biden took that critique of western “democracy” and left it as a critique of democracy itself, despite Xi routinely expressing motive to improve democracy. Read the speech Democracy is not an Ornament by Xi Jinping to see what he means. He is specifically advocating for the Chinese democratic model, which has much higher rates of civilian satisfaction than Western models.