Normally they're pretty good, but man, that is a bad fucking take. Yeah, I'm sure China is going to fall apart annnnny day now because it's exactly the same as the US.

    • Huldra [they/them, it/its]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Theres critique and then there is "China is just an authoritarian Marxist facade", like what the fuck is anyone going to respond to that with?

      If everything is just secretly a charade and bullshit, nothing anyone says is going to change that idea, if you show any evidence then thats just actually part of the coverup.

      • HamManBad [he/him]
        ·
        3 years ago

        They're anarchists, from their perspective any state is going to be a facade. I like the podcast but they explicitly state that they are ultras.

        • Huldra [they/them, it/its]
          ·
          3 years ago

          tbf thats an ultra position, but not inherently a position of anarchism as a whole, theres a lot more analysis you could do from an anarchist perspective than just "These socialists think a state is necessary, this proves they are actually just power hungry authoritarians acting in bad faith".

          • Society_Liver [she/her]
            ·
            3 years ago

            We try very hard not to be sectarian here, so we ignore actual irreconcilable differences within the left.

          • Mardoniush [she/her]
            ·
            3 years ago

            Honestly, if you actually talk out the differences, there's a few points of difference with the more practical types of anarchists (AnSyns for example) but not much.

            It basically boils down to

            • Disagreements on what a revolutionary class monopoly of force actually is, and if it constitutes a "State"
            • How formal a hierarchy needs to be, how directly recallable it must be.
            • How strictly disciplined the Vanguard must be, and what does the vanguard consist of. (a disagreement hard-MLs have with Leftcoms, Luxemburgists, and CCs)
            • Interaction with current political systems (Electorialism in the Leninist sense of parliamentary shitposting. This is as far as I can tell the ONLY difference between an AnSyn and a Council Communist)

            These are strong disagreements, but honestly I think they're really productive ones to have in the left.

            I'm a very ML sympathetic "Stop trying to define my tendency-ist." (I guess if pressed I'm an "Old-Luxemburgist" as in I agree with Rosa's critiques of Leninism but not the 1920s Leftcoms.)

      • Duckduck [none/use name]
        ·
        3 years ago

        OK - I'll bite - what's a "legitimate" criticism of China? All I ever see is cheerleading and memes of golden Xi 100 feet tall.

        • Huldra [they/them, it/its]
          ·
          3 years ago

          For example, that they should put more effort into promoting social progress like for LGBTQ people, thats one that I see a lot that I have no fundamental problem with people putting forward, its pretty easy to see that while there have been improvements, they have come relatively slowly and late compared to many other countries.

          Avoid making these huge narrative statements about "Authoritarianism" or "betrayals" and point to real shit that is observable and can be changed without just having a regime change. Also avoid reliance on citing pure personal experiences or shit filtered through obvious propaganda channels.

        • comi [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Existence of billionaires, long working hours, kinda spotty healthcare, safety in work, also coal. But I’m chuang double agent :rat-salute:

    • Llituro [he/him, they/them]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Sure, but there's a difference between that and calling it an authoritarian regime that's ready to crack.

    • SolidaritySplodarity [they/them]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Who would be stopping them? The people with power love this and will be throwing The Antifada into the mass grave with you and me later anyways.

      This is not some kind of socialist debate that exists outside of the New Cold War, it assists the US State Department and the new measures against China by the United States. In addition, it's not a useful or productive "critique", but very typical Western anticommunism: naive, shallow, and dismissive.

    • winterchillie [she/her]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Yes, obviously, but there's a difference between principled criticism, and repeating state department propaganda about their country.