- 0 Posts
- 17 Comments
pathetic
RFA scare stories were all you chauvinist losers had, and now it’s gone
0·10 days agoimo, your included text was better because it dropped the bold. thank you
the overuse of bolded phrases in the original article makes it harder to read
Ubigi offers China E-Sims. They’ve been good for me in other countries, but I haven’t tried them in China yet
Apartheid Defense League
“what if we used some of the proceeds of the bloodsoaked orphan-crushing machine to make our lives better?”
0·17 days agosame, both of my parents got this in December 2019
c’mon Bernie if you form a new party we’ll let you bomb Yugoslavia one more time just for funsies
The Telegraph lays it out pretty reasonably in this article in my opinion, and since it’s a right wing tory rag I assume no liberals are gonna accuse me of it being “commie propaganda” lmao.
But don’t just take that as the only example. How about we also look back at old articles written at the time it actually occurred?
CBS NEWS: “We saw no bodies, injured people, ambulances or medical personnel — in short, nothing to even suggest, let alone prove, that a “massacre” had occurred in [Tiananmen Square]”
BBC NEWS: “I was one of the foreign journalists who witnessed the events that night. There was no massacre on Tiananmen Square”
NY TIMES: In June 13, 1989, NY Times reporter Nicholas Kristof – who was in Beijing at that time – wrote, “State television has even shown film of students marching peacefully away from the [Tiananmen] square shortly after dawn as proof that they [protesters] were not slaughtered.” In that article, he also debunked an unidentified student protester who had claimed in a sensational article that Chinese soldiers with machine guns simply mowed down peaceful protesters in Tiananmen Square.
REUTERS: Graham Earnshaw was in the Tiananmen Square on the night of June 3. He didn’t leave the square until the morning of June 4th. He wrote in his memoir that the military came, negotiated with the students and made everyone (including himself) leave peacefully; and that nobody died in the square.
A Wikileaks cable from the US Embassy in Beijing (sent in July 1989) also reveals the eyewitness accounts of a Latin American diplomat and his wife: “They were able to enter and leave the [Tiananmen] square several times and were not harassed by troops. Remaining with students … until the final withdrawal, the diplomat said there were no mass shootings in the square or the monument.”
If instead of me using western major news sources to support my point you’d somehow still want this from my communist perspective. These three pieces are pretty good:
https://redsails.org/another-view-of-tiananmen/
https://www.liberationnews.org/tiananmen-the-massacre-that-wasnt/
0·1 year agoyou might like this essay
What we see during COVID-19 is stark operational differences between nations where politicians are the top authorities, and nations where Capital is the top authority. We are endlessly told that nations with activist governments are unfree, and that any support for these governments must come from either a pathological culture of obedience or the threat of state violence. And yet socialist nations plainly outperformed capitalist ones in terms of fighting the virus. [12]
This analysis does not imply there were simply two modes of response: capitalist and socialist. Market domination is not a binary affair, and Capital doesn’t rule by decree. As Roberts puts it, the market doesn’t tell capitalists what to do — rather, they have to guess and prognosticate and forecast and hope. Capitalists don’t find out whether they did what the market wanted until after the fact. [13] People around the world defended themselves from the virus, repressing the political will of Capital, in proportion to what they could get away with politically and economically. In socialist states, resources were deployed as deemed necessary to meet the challenge. In capitalist states in the sphere of influence of socialist China, such as South Korea, capitalists offered a decent response, perhaps because catastrophic handling would create a domestic political shift in favour of socialism. In the imperial core, where white supremacy reigns and there is no political will whatsoever to look to China for a good example, self-assured capitalists simply allowed the plague to spread essentially unopposed. In fact, imperialists succeeded to a great extent in turning the ensuing resentment into a foreign policy weapon. [14] This isn’t isolated to the most proudly capitalist nations; the kind of political power, infrastructure, and resources needed to enforce a tolerable quarantine has been completely eroded in social democratic havens like Canada and Sweden. No notable political force in the West referred to socialist successes in their efforts to affect domestic COVID-19 response policy, and I attribute this mistake to chauvinism.
from https://redsails.org/why-marxism/
also recommended:
reforms have happened under monarchies. what you seem to be missing is that all states are class dictatorships. the state is the means by which one class opresses another. only the working class wants to abolish class entirely.
if you are making an appeal to democratic reform under capitalism, your “democracy” is a sham and here’s why
Concessions are only granted when the capitalists feel threatened by a worker’s movement, not when people vote hard enough.