Capitalists, particular in the US, love to dunk on Revolutions which had purges of any kind (even the very inoffensive purge of Batista-loyalists in the early years of the Cuban Revolution). Or state censorship of any variety.
They're deliberately missing the point, by avoiding any meaningful discussion of what rights to autonomy a Communist state has. Ignoring the historical context in which the US invests billions upon billions of dollars in anti-Communist, pro-capital propaganda in these countries to the point where it's necessary for the state to clamp down. Absent massive amounts of buying power/capital, what mechanism does a state have to fight incredibly well-financed, insidiously crafted and emotionally exploitative foreign propaganda? The only option is force, which the capitalists then decry as inhumane... I have a background in developing anti-censorship software, so I usually surprised people when I'm very neutral on Chinese state censorship (even today, in the very much not-Communist PRC).
Naturally, I make similar concessions for removing those financed by foreign capital. And I understand the deep paranoia that this stuff breeds. It's hard to allow a "marketplace of ideas" the closer in time you are to the Revolution, because it's impossible for the Revolutionaries to tell if you're just a harmless thinker misled by capitalist propaganda, someone who is genuinely worse off under communism because you were part of an oppressive class or just because you were a skilled labourer, or if you're an asset of foreign capital. It breeds deep paranoia which I think persists in the policies of states which shouldn't really be considered communist any longer. It has a lasting effect essentially, PRC and Russia are good examples of post-Communist states with lasting censorship regimes.
Things are reasonably going to be unstable post-Revolution, capital will immediately seize on that uncertainty to propagandize a population with the best outcomes of capitalism, and the state very naturally lacks the tools to combat that with 0 use of force. But the truth is much harder for most people to accept: Those capitalist states are naturally unsustainable and do as much as possible to obfuscate the human suffering inherent both domestically and within insidious neocolonial if not outright colonial systems of enslavement.
I would Love to hear more of your perspective on censorship (internet/social media) in the PRC.
I personally agree that it is quite justifiable and understandable. But all the time western "leftist" types will bring it up and compare it to the US and say some bullshit "at least we’re free".
obviously that is very easy to say when your government isn’t meaningfully threatened at all.
Capitalists, particular in the US, love to dunk on Revolutions which had purges of any kind (even the very inoffensive purge of Batista-loyalists in the early years of the Cuban Revolution). Or state censorship of any variety.
They're deliberately missing the point, by avoiding any meaningful discussion of what rights to autonomy a Communist state has. Ignoring the historical context in which the US invests billions upon billions of dollars in anti-Communist, pro-capital propaganda in these countries to the point where it's necessary for the state to clamp down. Absent massive amounts of buying power/capital, what mechanism does a state have to fight incredibly well-financed, insidiously crafted and emotionally exploitative foreign propaganda? The only option is force, which the capitalists then decry as inhumane... I have a background in developing anti-censorship software, so I usually surprised people when I'm very neutral on Chinese state censorship (even today, in the very much not-Communist PRC).
Naturally, I make similar concessions for removing those financed by foreign capital. And I understand the deep paranoia that this stuff breeds. It's hard to allow a "marketplace of ideas" the closer in time you are to the Revolution, because it's impossible for the Revolutionaries to tell if you're just a harmless thinker misled by capitalist propaganda, someone who is genuinely worse off under communism because you were part of an oppressive class or just because you were a skilled labourer, or if you're an asset of foreign capital. It breeds deep paranoia which I think persists in the policies of states which shouldn't really be considered communist any longer. It has a lasting effect essentially, PRC and Russia are good examples of post-Communist states with lasting censorship regimes.
Things are reasonably going to be unstable post-Revolution, capital will immediately seize on that uncertainty to propagandize a population with the best outcomes of capitalism, and the state very naturally lacks the tools to combat that with 0 use of force. But the truth is much harder for most people to accept: Those capitalist states are naturally unsustainable and do as much as possible to obfuscate the human suffering inherent both domestically and within insidious neocolonial if not outright colonial systems of enslavement.
Thanks comrade, excellent writeup.
I would Love to hear more of your perspective on censorship (internet/social media) in the PRC. I personally agree that it is quite justifiable and understandable. But all the time western "leftist" types will bring it up and compare it to the US and say some bullshit "at least we’re free". obviously that is very easy to say when your government isn’t meaningfully threatened at all.