Holy shit talk about proving me right. China’s “sino-centric ideology”… Is that the same ideology that has led the world’s most advanced multi-cultural state organizing systems with autonomous regions for large ethnic groups and over 57 different ethinicities formally recognized and developed? Is it the same one where Tibetans learn their native language from grade school through university? That sino-centric ideology? If that ideology came to the West would it do us good? Abso-fucking-lutely. Because in the West, there’s an ACTUAL (as opposed to imagined) desire for an ethnostate that is enforced through genocide in all of its worst forms. There are native American tribes that have fewer than 10 fluent speakers of their language and they are all over 70. Your claim of a sino-centric ideology is projection.

China does not desire global hegemony. That would be stupid. Why would it be stupid? We are watching what happens to global hegemons in real-time. They are unsustainable, completely unstable, and involve contradictions that will tear them apart. China’s entire founding principles are based on socio-political theory that details this at length. China is not trying to become the next US because it knows that way lies ruin.

The idea that the only solution is to do literally exactly what you’ve been doing for 600 years, consolidating the West to dominate the globe, which it already does, destroy and carve up all opposition, like it already did, and ultimately subjugate, again, the majority of the world’s population to protect the minority, is just full on mask-off fascism…again.

hexbear has existed and been building their userbase for 3 years, but during that time their codebase diverged greatly from mainline lemmy to include in-house tweaks and features which made it not possible to federate, and it’s only within the past month that they got everything compatible

Democracy lives off of discourse between opposing views.

The inference here is that both views are of equivalent merit which is very much not true. This idea is called The Paradox of Tolerance. If a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually ceased or destroyed by the intolerant.

I would not call them far left tbh. There’s something else about them that irks me. It honestly feels more North Korean to me and that ain’t left by any stretch of the imagination. It seems to be more authoritarian minded.

Territorial waters are defined as 12 nautical miles typically from the shore

BY WHOM IS IT DEFINED? You don’t need to answer the question here. We all know the answer. It’s the “rules-based international order”, you know, the one invented by white genociders that dominated and subjugated 80% of the world population. But do go on about how the definition of territorial waters is perfectly compatible with the US encircling China with nuclear capabilities, occupying much of the region, colonizing and subjugating various indigenous peoples on various islands so they can test weapons and prepare for war. It’s CHINA that’s being a problem.

There is a reason why China is literally building fake islands to increase it’s territorial water claim there.

Awww, what’s the matter? Are you upset when the fake rules that whitey made to dominate the globe are sometimes used by non-whites to game the system in small ways that show everyone just how vacuous and bankrupt the West really is?

How about you focus on things like why China is even the UN at all, how the US refused to let the PRC into the UN and instead decided that the KMT should be at the UN despite the KMT prosecuting the White Terror and mass murdering people by the thousands for so much as suggesting that maybe they should end the civil war officially and integrate with China now that the PLA had demonstrated they had the overwhelming majority of popular support.

Just showing off your ignorance like your proud of it

The nazis were all about privatization, read a damn book

this is historically illiterate. the term privatization was coined specifically to describe what the Nazis were doing in Germany.

“In return for business assistance, the Nazis hastened to give evidence of their good will by restoring to private capitalism a number of monopolies held or controlled by the state."

In other words, the Nazis specifically took certain businesses that were formerly nationalized and then privatized them.

For further reading:

• Retrospectives The Coining of “Privatization” and Germany’s National Socialist Party - Article from Journal of Economic Perspectives
• Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany - Research paper from the University of Barcelona

Sweety, Albert Speer literally said that NAZI Germany was “an daughter company of IG Farben”.

You “study history” off of youtube don’t you?

Ha ha no problem.

😔

It’s a coincidence

Their government.

Any citizen with at least two endorsements from other citizens.

For their peer, they vote for the most competent to run the govt, not some snake oil sales man or senile old man that rely on pr popularity to run the damn country. Look at Nigeria, a drug lord successfully make peoples vote for him and now they’re in the brink of war even though peoples don’t like it,

It’s amazing how you people put on this fake act about caring about racism and bigotry, it’s really astonishing

This is very ironic coming from someone parroting Adrian Zenz’s cynical atrocity propaganda.

currently trying to genocide

This piqued my interest, since a lot of the Uyghur genocide narrative collapsed years ago to the point that even the journalists that were reporting it began walking it back.

Taking a look at who is currently reporting on “Uyghur genocide” in 2023, and it’s all organisations like Voice of America, Radio Free Asia, United States Institute of Peace - basically (literal) US government propaganda agencies reporting on the US congress proceedings.

This is infact holocaust denial you are doing and it is a bad look.

Eternally mad the UN report sided with the tankies (the entire UN is tankies as well you see)

we care so much we checked the claim ! its bullshit

Imagine for a split second that the strongest government in the world is constantly attempting to cause the overthrow of your legitimately popular government, despite it being popular and significantly beloved by almost all people there. This external, most powerful government in the world tried to cause unrest in every possible way, including funding all opposition groups and organizations regardless of their violent/genocidal intent (e.g. Falun Gong, Islamic terror groups) and cause unrest on your borders (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Korea).

What do you do? When good faith polling shows that you’re popular and fulfilling the needs and desires of your country’s working class but a foreign press tries to speak about the terribleness and need for overthrow, do you just let that happen with more money and propoganda than you can possibly provide to support yourself? Or do you censor the BS and report to your population that these images/ideas/orgs are actually subversive and attempting to change the government they legitimately love.

In this hypothetical situation, what do you propose? Allowing the propaganda but claiming it’s wrong has failed in many projects, and resulted in massacres once fascism won (Chile, Indonesia). Just trying to set up a wall of no information works for a bit, but info can cross anyways (USSR). Allowing limited access if you search for it but not allowing it’s widespread propagation is the method of china. A VPN allows you to see it all, but it can’t be spread too widely before it is stopped from being viral.

Do you have a better solution? Because this is how China presents itself and how the Chinese population sees it

And in hindsight, not such a great person. Or at least had a lot of negatives to go along with his positives. Probably best to hard code not only a term limit, but an age limit on elected officials. I’m tired of the world being run by geriatrics. Culture seems to be consistently 20 year ahead of government.

Unlike in China, the people here actually have the right to vote. That right does not exist in China

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?

Democracy is when you vote between red man and blue man, both of whom have the same policies.

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

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?