The far-right populist Alternative for Germany party rejects a values-based foreign policy, just as much as it rejects NATO and the US. That approach has attracted the attention of Beijing.
It's a one-party state with all candidates chosen by the party.
It may wear the skin of a democracy, but it is not a democracy.
This is the vaguest description ever and it's not even correct with the vague points. There are multiple parties, and given that there are multiple parties the candidates certainly aren't chosen by one party.
How are candidates chosen? Who elects them? When are elections held? What is the structure of the elections?
Do you know any of these things? Serious question. Have you ever investigated and learned this topic thoroughly? You know how the US system works I assume, I bet you vaguely understand some other systems too, like parliamentary ones such as the UK (or not, could be wrong). Have you ever actually investigated the topic or have you just passively repeated vague statements made by other people who are also passively repeating vague statements about it?
If you want me to I can in fact give you a fairly good summary of how the Chinese system actually works. But do you even want to know? Are you actually open to learning?
Though, in fairness, red man is actively hostile to LGBT people, migrants, and women whereas blue man is content to let LGBT people, migrants, and women suffer via apathetic neglect instead.
Weird how democracy didn't stop the genocide of the Native Americans, or the Aboriginal People of Australia, or the First Nations. I guess "true democracy" has just never been tried.
Two Jews meet on the U-Bahn in 1935. One is reading a Nazi newspaper. His friend asks him "how can you read those outrageous lies about us?!" He replies "If I read a real newspaper, its persecution this and deportation that. But in this paper? We own all the banks, the movies, the government!"
Classic but red flag (lol) conspiracy theory vibes in this context. Jewish people owning China or vice versa? Either way fits more in line with qanonists
God could the point go over your head harder. That user wasn't engaging in a conspiracy theory that Jews on all the banks movies and government, they were comparing your apparent belief that the Chinese government controls the American government to those antisemitic conspiracy theories.
Also zero points in an argument with a bunch of people who can't downvote
I think that in 30 years you'll be considered the anti-Semite of this age, honestly. Sartre once famously claimed something like "if the Nazi didn't have the jew, they would have created him."
Sartre, for all his faults, understood that fascism always needed the external and periphery, whether defined geographically or ethnically, in order to sustain itself through expropriation. Who this was doesn't matter as much as that this group is defined as having more than it deserves for bad reasons and is therefore justifiable as a victim of violent expropriation. The values represented have become more progressive™ in that you believe China owns American representatives in order to mistreat Muslims or something. But materially it's identical to "Judeo-Bolshevik" antisemitism
Here's a bite-sized analysis from a guy who's pretty good at this:
I remember fascists have been calling antifascists fascists for a long time but "the anti-Semite of this age" is definitely one of the most despicably hateful derogatory things I've seen in a while.
Edit: no, I do not open links from Musk's alt-right-landia
Actually, I first posted only hog but I'll give you 1 more comment. Before I decide I'm wasting time.
How do you understand the anti-Semitism that defined 1917(?)-1945 fascism? How did this phenomenon arise and what interests were represented by the actions that these beliefs supported? Don't just give me the Ur-fascism definition, or some extra-simplified version (palingenetic ultranationalism) of this unless you can really describe WHY it arises. I wanna know the why behind the entire process, because, like is claimed in the link I sent, anti-Semitism was defined as explicitly different from normal hatred of Jews/judeophobia which unfortunately was around at that time.
But if it seems you didn't read the 2 minutes of screenshots in the link I sent, I will just post hog to you from that point lol
It's a one-party state with all candidates chosen by the party.
I much prefer all those two or three party states where the candidates are chosen by their respective parties on the marching orders of the capitalist class
the representatives are chosen by their parties in most countries, including the US. the difference is that in western "democracies" there's two or more parties all representing the same interests - those of the capitalist class - posing the electorate with a false choice. how is this improvement?
It's a one-party state with all candidates chosen by the party.
It may wear the skin of a democracy, but it is not a democracy.
This is the vaguest description ever and it's not even correct with the vague points. There are multiple parties, and given that there are multiple parties the candidates certainly aren't chosen by one party.
How are candidates chosen? Who elects them? When are elections held? What is the structure of the elections?
Do you know any of these things? Serious question. Have you ever investigated and learned this topic thoroughly? You know how the US system works I assume, I bet you vaguely understand some other systems too, like parliamentary ones such as the UK (or not, could be wrong). Have you ever actually investigated the topic or have you just passively repeated vague statements made by other people who are also passively repeating vague statements about it?
If you want me to I can in fact give you a fairly good summary of how the Chinese system actually works. But do you even want to know? Are you actually open to learning?
I've investigated Chinese Democracy thoroughly and vastly prefer Use Your Illusion II or Appetite for Destruction
Can't beat the classics but the only Chinese Democracy is a surprisingly good album!
Democracy is when you vote between red man and blue man, both of whom have the same policies.
And both are funded by the same Bankers, Weapons Makers and Resource Extractors
Though, in fairness, red man is actively hostile to LGBT people, migrants, and women whereas blue man is content to let LGBT people, migrants, and women suffer via apathetic neglect instead.
Truly a vibrant political system.
Democracy is when The People Decide if trans people should exist but the tax rate policy is written by the rich
Weird how democracy didn't stop the genocide of the Native Americans, or the Aboriginal People of Australia, or the First Nations. I guess "true democracy" has just never been tried.
Let's topple all fake democracies. China's red-blue man owns US's red and blue men anyway.
Two Jews meet on the U-Bahn in 1935. One is reading a Nazi newspaper. His friend asks him "how can you read those outrageous lies about us?!" He replies "If I read a real newspaper, its persecution this and deportation that. But in this paper? We own all the banks, the movies, the government!"
Classic but red flag (lol) conspiracy theory vibes in this context. Jewish people owning China or vice versa? Either way fits more in line with qanonists
God could the point go over your head harder. That user wasn't engaging in a conspiracy theory that Jews on all the banks movies and government, they were comparing your apparent belief that the Chinese government controls the American government to those antisemitic conspiracy theories.
Also zero points in an argument with a bunch of people who can't downvote
Whooooosh lol 😉
Would someone actually create a "your apparent belief" in their mind from that
You know what, it's not even apparent, you explicitly stated it:
There's actually a looong leap from the known China-sponsored politicians to antisemitic cabal conspiracy theories
Not really, no.
That tells a lot of those who think that
I think that in 30 years you'll be considered the anti-Semite of this age, honestly. Sartre once famously claimed something like "if the Nazi didn't have the jew, they would have created him."
Sartre, for all his faults, understood that fascism always needed the external and periphery, whether defined geographically or ethnically, in order to sustain itself through expropriation. Who this was doesn't matter as much as that this group is defined as having more than it deserves for bad reasons and is therefore justifiable as a victim of violent expropriation. The values represented have become more progressive™ in that you believe China owns American representatives in order to mistreat Muslims or something. But materially it's identical to "Judeo-Bolshevik" antisemitism
Here's a bite-sized analysis from a guy who's pretty good at this:
https://twitter.com/RodericDay/status/1495054681579692035?t=gmJyzLx5go9hZWcFJkt5fw&s=19
I remember fascists have been calling antifascists fascists for a long time but "the anti-Semite of this age" is definitely one of the most despicably hateful derogatory things I've seen in a while.
Edit: no, I do not open links from Musk's alt-right-landia
Actually, I first posted only hog but I'll give you 1 more comment. Before I decide I'm wasting time.
How do you understand the anti-Semitism that defined 1917(?)-1945 fascism? How did this phenomenon arise and what interests were represented by the actions that these beliefs supported? Don't just give me the Ur-fascism definition, or some extra-simplified version (palingenetic ultranationalism) of this unless you can really describe WHY it arises. I wanna know the why behind the entire process, because, like is claimed in the link I sent, anti-Semitism was defined as explicitly different from normal hatred of Jews/judeophobia which unfortunately was around at that time.
But if it seems you didn't read the 2 minutes of screenshots in the link I sent, I will just post hog to you from that point lol
Did you seriously read this as saying the Nazis were right?
I don't know who would read that
I much prefer all those two or three party states where the candidates are chosen by their respective parties on the marching orders of the capitalist class
lmao dog you shoulda just said "i don't know anything about that, why don't you tell me?"
it still would have taken you zero effort and you'd have avoided embarrassing yourself
According to their respective peoples, China has an infinitely more vibrant and responsive democracy than the United States.
I'd hate to think you'd be so blind to the irony of saying such a thing as 'wearing the skin of democracy' if you were living in the west.
Either way I'd be ashamed to act like you have and speak despite having such ignorance about the Chinese system of democracy.
So you don't know the structure
the representatives are chosen by their parties in most countries, including the US. the difference is that in western "democracies" there's two or more parties all representing the same interests - those of the capitalist class - posing the electorate with a false choice. how is this improvement?
Democracy is when the people hate their government and the more they hate it the more democratic it is