Maybe political repression and the mass killing of protestors and the internment of ethnic minorities has very little to do with a countries mode of production. Maybe you guys can advocate for an alternative mode of production without defending genocide and using the military to crack down on protests? And maybe liberals can do the same when Western Capitalist Countries do it?
Maybe political repression and the mass killing of protestors and the internment of ethnic minorities has very little to do with a countries mode of production.
Or maybe not. You can’t deny the intrinsic need to oppress the serfs in a feudalist system. Every economic downturn leads to a new wave of revolts and another cycle of state violence.
The '89 Tianamen protesters came out of state privatization reforms. And the state response (whether you believe that to be mass detainment and expulsion from Beijing or wholesale blood drenched slaughter of innocents) was necessary to continue the process unimpeded.
Maybe you guys can advocate for an alternative mode of production without defending genocide and using the military to crack down on protests? And maybe liberals can do the same when Western Capitalist Countries do it?
The focal point of the conflict is irrevocably tied to the propaganda.
Western Capitalists believe liberal democracy is working to deliver popular policy through nonviolent means. And that China was stripped and gutted of individual freedom under the Maoist revolution. An ongoing brutal genocide is necessary to keep state communist officials in place.
Eastern oriented Maoists believe China is upholding a popular Mass Line, and it is the Western Capitalists who hold their population in a police choke hold, squeezing the life out of a popular socialist revolt with every new generation.
What’s the truth? Is popular governance happening in either country? Is it possible at all, or just a pretext for state violence?
Socialism is inherently authoritarian and Marx praised genocide in china in 19th century. You cannot support any variant of socialism without being a genocidal fuck.
There’s a good chance that the welfare system in whatever country you live in was built by these social democratic parties and influenced by its left wing of democratic socialists.
Even in the U.S. FDR’s Liberalism has been called “bootleg social democracy” by some historians, and his policies were influenced (though often more as concessions than willing adoption) of the more socialist leaning unions of his time.
Even today, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party could be described as social democratic, with its leftmost members (Bernie Sanders and AOC) being democratic socialists.
Maybe political repression and the mass killing of protestors and the internment of ethnic minorities has very little to do with a countries mode of production. Maybe you guys can advocate for an alternative mode of production without defending genocide and using the military to crack down on protests? And maybe liberals can do the same when Western Capitalist Countries do it?
please… :(
Or maybe not. You can’t deny the intrinsic need to oppress the serfs in a feudalist system. Every economic downturn leads to a new wave of revolts and another cycle of state violence.
The '89 Tianamen protesters came out of state privatization reforms. And the state response (whether you believe that to be mass detainment and expulsion from Beijing or wholesale blood drenched slaughter of innocents) was necessary to continue the process unimpeded.
The focal point of the conflict is irrevocably tied to the propaganda.
Western Capitalists believe liberal democracy is working to deliver popular policy through nonviolent means. And that China was stripped and gutted of individual freedom under the Maoist revolution. An ongoing brutal genocide is necessary to keep state communist officials in place.
Eastern oriented Maoists believe China is upholding a popular Mass Line, and it is the Western Capitalists who hold their population in a police choke hold, squeezing the life out of a popular socialist revolt with every new generation.
What’s the truth? Is popular governance happening in either country? Is it possible at all, or just a pretext for state violence?
Hard to say. But it’s clear somebody is lying.
Socialism is inherently authoritarian and Marx praised genocide in china in 19th century. You cannot support any variant of socialism without being a genocidal fuck.
Citation required
Idk man democratic socialists seem to have been succeeding in doing it almost globally for a century now.
Look at the left of any social democratic party and you’re bound to find some.
I don’t know what you’re talking about.
There’s this thing called social democracy,
and almost every nation in the world has a social democratic party. The left wing of these social democratic parties tend to be full on democratic socialists.
There’s a good chance that the welfare system in whatever country you live in was built by these social democratic parties and influenced by its left wing of democratic socialists.
Even in the U.S. FDR’s Liberalism has been called “bootleg social democracy” by some historians, and his policies were influenced (though often more as concessions than willing adoption) of the more socialist leaning unions of his time. Even today, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party could be described as social democratic, with its leftmost members (Bernie Sanders and AOC) being democratic socialists.