On Thursday, Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said the United States should reflect on why it adopted different positions on the two events. She said the storming of the Hong Kong legislature was more “severe” than the events in Washington, but there were no fatalities among the protesters.
“In ... 2019, radical demonstrators [in Hong Kong] violently stormed the city’s Legislative Council building, wantonly damaged facilities, used toxic powders and liquids to attack and beat the police, and even [allegedly] bit a police officer’s finger off,” Hua said. “Facing a situation like this, Hong Kong police had kept a high degree of restraint and no demonstrators died.
“Now the US mainstream media had unanimously criticised violent Trump fans in [Washington], saying it’s a violent event and those protesters are mobs, extremists ... But what description did they use on the Hong Kong protest? ‘Beautiful sight’.” Hua was referring to US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s comments about mass demonstrations in June 2019 in Hong Kong as a “beautiful sight to behold”.
Good thing your experience with divorced parents gives better insight into socialism than Fidel Castro’s struggle to implement such in the face of capitalist encirclement. He may have thought China was the greatest hope for socialism and the third world, but you know better because your parents divorced.
also, when the cuban revolution was fresh, china was still communist. ineptly so, but... kinda.
Fidel said this about China recently https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telesurenglish.net/amp/opinion/China-Is-Most-Promising-Hope-for-Third-World-Fidel-20171128-0017.html
then he was senile or LYING FOR THE GOOD OF HIS PEOPLE, or in that space old people sometimes get to where they say something true they believe, and shit changes and it's obviously not true but they can't let go of it. or he was just a lucky idiot whose people got woke fast and made their little island kick ass in spite of his idiocy.
one or more of those.
No, he wasn’t. He was right and you are wrong.
oh. well if we're arguing at that level, I guess I need to defer to your superior intellect. I can no longer engage. unless you're willing to prove conclusively, with scientific certainty, that none of these scenarios could possibly have been true.
Sorry, I’m taking the word of third world socialists at face value and not assuming that they are lying unless proven beyond a shadow of a doubt otherwise. What an incredible amount of western chauvinism.
certainly you're not talking about the people of mainland china; they'd be shot in minutes when they proposed taking ownership of the means of production back from the billionaires.
Your turn! Can you back up that claim?
Removed by mod
Lol western chauvinism AND Reddit level debate bro shit. Nice
Removed by mod
Asking someone to scientifically prove a negative when the positive has no evidence for it is a spicy take.
it was hyperbole and a mirror of some shit you people were asking. a way of saying "theres absolutely no way I want to continue this discussion". please fuck off. I do not want to see this thread in my replies again.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
im using my personal experience to explain why I think the cubans are fucking lying for a lifeline and why I wouldn't hold it against them, especially considering their crap geopolitical hand.
could you try engaging in good faith?
Engage in good faith with “my parents divorced so I know a thing or two about this geopolitical situation”? Why? It’s obviously not a good faith argument.
They would have no reason to “fucking lie” about something like that, the Chinese government will trade with literally anybody. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
the chinese are shameless capitalists, and the cubans have a long history or being fucked and isolated. nobody would blame them for erring on the side of caution, and trading some lip service for not being completely fucking gouged on every trade.
Western leftists are such a joke, in two comments you went from “why not hold up Cuba” to “Fidel is a lucky idiot” because he held up China as the best hope for socialism. You are 100% clueless, and there wasn’t even enough time for you to read the article and see what Fidel said before responding. Absurd.
no. no I said at first he was a liar-which is not criticism. I presented three alternative scenarios, suggesting that he was a real human being with real human flaws, an old dude who maybe wasn't all there at the end (IDK, but it would explain the statement), OR that he was an idiot and cuba's success was in spite of him, not because of him.
I did not say he was an idiot. I said it was one possible explanation, if you absolutely rule out him being able to tell a lie, which was where my money was. which would have made him a pretty shitty geurilla but whatever.
stop responding. I would like to disengage, because I don't believe you're engaging in good faith.
Removed by mod