oh no, beijing's repressive political system, if only they had our blessed American government they could be grinding the working class to the bone so much better 😔 😔 😔 😔 😔 😔
My understanding is that literally almost all global gains against poverty have come from China, you know the gains against poverty neoliberals like to attribute to neoliberalism?? Haha it's all been in China. China actually plans and builds infrastructure for people to use and live in. Remember all the articles about Chinese ghost cities, with the implication being that China was building a bunch of useless buildings to juice their GDP? Yeah people live in those now.
Something like 95% home ownership? Etc etc etc etc.
I remember Westerners malding African countries did better with Covid than them even though they have a lot of things going for them (young population, less densely populated, experience with handling pandemics).
Remember when Bill Gates stepped in and coerced that university in to copyrighting their vaccine instead of gifting it to the world for the good of humanity? Lol.
During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.
“During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.”
― Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism
oh no, beijing's repressive political system, if only they had our blessed American government they could be grinding the working class to the bone so much better 😔 😔 😔 😔 😔 😔
My understanding is that both china and the us get off on fucking over the working class
My understanding is that literally almost all global gains against poverty have come from China, you know the gains against poverty neoliberals like to attribute to neoliberalism?? Haha it's all been in China. China actually plans and builds infrastructure for people to use and live in. Remember all the articles about Chinese ghost cities, with the implication being that China was building a bunch of useless buildings to juice their GDP? Yeah people live in those now.
Something like 95% home ownership? Etc etc etc etc.
I mean are those numbers on home ownership that china reported on itself? First party info is kind of biased.
Either way, china produces such cheap goods by fucking over its workers. Those gains against poverty is still just working class exploitation.
"Those numbers are fake! And if they aren't fake, they don't count!"
remember when the west kept accusing China of fucking with its covid numbers but actually that was pretty much every western nation? lol
Sure do; westerners literally couldn't imagine a non-white country doing better than them.
I remember Westerners malding African countries did better with Covid than them even though they have a lot of things going for them (young population, less densely populated, experience with handling pandemics).
Remember when Bill Gates stepped in and coerced that university in to copyrighting their vaccine instead of gifting it to the world for the good of humanity? Lol.
I am never not thinking about how they thought covid was gonna go
During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.
🙄
🙄
“During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.”
― Michael Parenti, Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism
deleted by creator
Your understanding is wrong