What’s that one parenti quote that all authors who note the good Stalin/USSR/Mao did have to layer condemnations of the system in between?

Lib in many ways but clearly demonstrates how much better Bernie would've been

Maybe I am being too harsh but this is a very subpar article not at all impressed. Repeating the same old campaign promises while also decidedly proving he doesn't know any better when it comes to China's internal affairs. He is not a senile old man about to drop dead at any moment and he understands it is not appropriate to go along with the war drums so easily, at the same time he is holding some very contradictory views.

I believe it is important to challenge this new consensus—just as it was important to challenge the old one. The Chinese government is surely guilty of many policies and practices that I oppose and that all Americans should oppose: the theft of technology, the suppression of workers’ rights and the press, the repression taking place in Tibet and Hong Kong, Beijing’s threatening behavior toward Taiwan, and the Chinese government’s atrocious policies toward the Uyghur people. The United States should also be concerned about China’s aggressive global ambitions.

This is literally the entire State Department talking point bingo right here. Proving he is completely clueless about China and how much he trusts the government narrative despite trying to claim he wants to be skeptical. You can't do that if you accept every file with a CIA stamp on it as true buddy. And some points are specialy infuriating. Fucking technology theft, China is now spending more on R&D as a % of GDP then the EU, the US stagnated for the past 20 years

This entire article is double speak and the only difference I can see is that he wants to push for bilateral talks and negotiation. The thing is at some point President Bernie would need to come to terms with the demands of the capitalist class and China's refusal to accept those demands. The problem isn't negotiation, but what you are willing to do once the negotiations fail. He clearly wants a return to the old order, he spells it out:

For the American people to thrive, others around the world need to believe that the United States is their ally and that their successes are our successes.

What if I told you that people around the world no longer want to be US "allies" and why is that a bad thing? In fact this was the reality of the past 30 years since the fall of the USSR, there is no alternative but to be a "US ally" and what the fuck did that accomplish? Just a few wars, global poverty and soon our planet will be mostly uninhabitable.

Americans must not be naive about China’s repression, disregard for human rights, and global ambitions.

So he is willing to confront China and he readily concedes no other country is allowed to have "global ambitions". What is that even supposed to mean? Is it bad when China has closer ties to Latin America your backyard than you? If you admit that then drop the charade already, we might as well be living in 1965.

So in the end we go back to the first quote where he proves how quickly he fell in line and believes all the CIA shit and is completely unwilling and/or incapable of having a dissenting opinion. And this isn't just the usual lib shit, but he shows he clearly believes in an American centered world order where USians need to be "careful" about anyone with "global ambitions".

The only meaningful difference is the method, there is no doubt he is on the same team as the American capitalist class, when he so clearly states the world must follow the current capitalist order with America in charge. The difference is he understands that the house needs repairs or it will collapse.

deleted by creator