• Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    22 hours ago

    The conversation around China will take a minute, so I’ll skip ahead to your second paragraph and circle back to do your statement justice.

    The people you describe as “tankies” do not exist in any reasonable number. You are extending a belief in some aspects of anti-western sources as full blind dogmatism. Secondly, in order to even consider oneself a Communist in a western-dominated website means exposure to constant western-narrative, the idea that eastern propaganda is much more effective is more of a smokescreen to avoid discussing hard topics than anything else.

    As for the PRC, they absolutely aren’t Anarchist. They are, however, Marxist-Leninist, and Socialist. They have a Socialist Market Economy. Their Public Sector has supremacy over the direction of the Private Sector as key heavy industries the Private Sector relies on are entirely State Owned, and the Private Sector itself is trapped in a “birdcage model” whereby the CPC increases ownership and control as Markets naturally form monopolist syndicates.

    This is entirely in line with Marxism. Marxists believe that markets naturally centralize and form monopolist syndicates ripe for central planning, and thus are more efficient vectors for growth at earlier stages in development, but that as they centralize this becomes less efficient and public ownership and central planning takes priority.

    I recommend the article Socialism Developed China, Not Capitalism.

    • PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      22 hours ago

      The people I’m describing as tankies are people I’ve interacted with myself. I’m sure they don’t exist in huge numbers, but they are more concentrated on .ml, they are loud, and they are impossible to converse with. I still like it here because most people here, like yourself, are smart and offering interesting perspectives I haven’t explored before.

      I agree that the idea of only Eastern propaganda being dangerous and pervasive is wrong. Western propaganda is everywhere too and also dangerous.

      One thing that is different is the lack of government-critical sources available from China, also Russia. Freedom of Speech in the West is wobbly, but in China and especially Russia it is even worse (from everything I’ve read).

      This is a lovely segue into our China sidequest, and while I agree on the definition, I have doubts on how public the public sector really is. The way that national election results look and the way vocal dissidents or political opposition are treated does not give me the idea that the people truly have all the power here.

      Capitalism concentrates power in the capitalist class. This class can then subvert democracy, resulting in oligarchy. In a similar way, central planning concentrates power in the central government, which actually makes it even easier to abuse that power. Chinese government is not transparent nor federal enough for me to call it democratic or owned by the people.

        • PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          21 hours ago

          No, and that’s a good point actually. Although I think the state of political opposition both in Russia and China speaks volumes.

          • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            21 hours ago

            This might be a hard pill to swallow, but Putin is largely popular among Russians for assisting with throwing out the Western Capitalists that bought the various slices of the former USSR after “Shock Doctrine” killed 7 million people with the re-introduction of Capitalism, and the CPC has an over 90% approval rate. Political opposition is largely limited because both governments have more support among their citizenry than Western governments do.

            • PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              21 hours ago

              I’m actually really happy that you mentioned Shock Doctrine because last time I was arguing with a tankie they called Naomi Klein a US state sanctioned liberal :D

              I already replied on another comment about the support

              • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                15
                ·
                edit-2
                20 hours ago

                Shock Doctrine is good theory regardless of whatever western brainworms reside in her. If people couldn’t separate theory we’d have to throw the whole thing out with Marx’s European brainworms.

                • robinn_ [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  ·
                  20 hours ago

                  Even in the very beginning you see the Western brainworms dangled in your face, but there are good aspects to the book.

                • PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  20 hours ago

                  yep <3

                  Unfortunately I’ve hat the displeasure of “conversing” with a few people who are unable to handle even that level of nuance

              • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                20 hours ago

                Klein herself is fairly liberal, but the impact on the post-Soviet citizenry is apt. 7 million people died so that the West could profit.

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        21 hours ago

        I appreciate you calling me smart and trying to have a conversation, however I want to stress something you said:

        I’m saying that tankies claim to be communists but spend all day parroting their favorite Russian or Chinese state propaganda because they believe everything else is clearly controlled by Obamna™ himself. They rarely actually talk about communism, they just roam Lemmy all day calling everybody who disagrees with them a liberal :D

        What you are seeing is one aspect of people, and moreover the ones with “favorite state propaganda” that distrust all western sources as liberal propaganda don’t exist. Even just seeing people debating endlessly on Lemmy.ml is just one aspect, people frequently have different accounts or discuss Communism on different threads than the ones they get into debates in.

        Additionally, I encourage you to look beyond the western veil. There are plenty of Russia-critical sources and China-critical sources in the east.

        With respect to China, I encourage you to look into processes like Whole Process People’s Democracy, State Owned Enterprises, and other aspects to see how Socialism with Chinese Characteristics works. I encourage you to read the article I linked, as well. Additionally, while I know you said you are an Anarchist, your point on centralization being a bad thing goes directly against Marxist understanding. I recommend the article Why Public Property?

        Capitalism concentrates itself and centralizes, which prepares the productive forces for the mechanisms required to centerally plan them after folding them into the Public Sector. Central Planning is the only way to truly democratize production in the eyes of Marxists.

      • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        One thing that is different is the lack of government-critical sources available from China, also Russia. Freedom of Speech in the West is wobbly, but in China and especially Russia it is even worse (from everything I’ve read).

        What have you read?

        Your freedom of speech is tolerated in the West to the extent thst it doesn’t threaten ruling class interests. The ruling class already owns all of the papers and TV channels and think tanks, they drown you out. You can never hope to push socialism through their apparatus. That is how effective their cemsorship already is: you’re told you have freedom of speech and then deplatformed. If you get a little louder, you might get a platform on occasion, but will then will still be drowned out by “competing” views.

        And if you fly too close to the sun, you will get direct government censorship. Ask Germany how “free speech” is going with regards yup Palestinian solidariry. Ask comrades in the US how free speech is going with Samidoun declared a terrorist orgsnization. Ask a former Black Panther for free their speech was while being soued on snd martyred by the feds and cops.

        If you actually do anything that matters, if you truly challenge the ruling powers in the West, you will need to be realistic and expect oppression. The idea that you have free speech is just pure propaganda.

        Re: China go on Weibo you will find plenty of criticism of the government. The idea that you can’t criticize the government in China is xenophoboc propaganda.

        Re: Russia: okay, but what is your point? There are bad things that happen in Russia so… their role against US imperialism is bad? Because that tends to be the only thing supported by “tankies”. The Russian Federation is a capitalist project created by capitalist revanchist shock therapy on the USSR that killed 7-10 million people. The West created the RF, its “oligarchs” are hust centralized capitalists like in othet countries in Europe, except the West continued to exclude Russia from the imperisl core, attempting to force it into the periphery (extraction snd poverty). What you see today is a regional capitalist power that is respinding to that. One where the national bourgeoisie are dominant rather than the international bourgeoisie, due to circumstances imposef on them. As a consequence, they often align against Western imperislism.

        This is a lovely segue into our China sidequest, and while I agree on the definition, I have doubts on how public the public sector really is. The way that national election results look and the way vocal dissidents or political opposition are treated does not give me the idea that the people truly have all the power here.

        Which is to say, you don’t actually know anything about it. Public means state-owned, by the way. Do you believe they aren’t actually owned by the state?

        Capitalism concentrates power in the capitalist class. This class can then subvert democracy, resulting in oligarchy.

        This has the false premise that the historical course of capitalism is to enter spaces that were already “democratic” in the bourgeois democratic sense. This is not true. Instead, capitalism itself gained power through the replacement of feudalistic giverning powers (like monarchies) with structures they could control, compatible with their ideas of “progress”. In short, they created bourgeous democracy. They were already in control. The question of concentration of capital changes the words but not the fact of who is in control.

        In a similar way, central planning concentrates power in the central government, which actually makes it even easier to abuse that power.

        In countries run by socialists, central planning is an exercise of power that already exists. The power is maintained through the oppression of competing classes and, traditionally, party bureaucracy.

        I don’t know what it could possibly mean to say it is “easier to abuse that power”, it is so vague and decontextualized thst it just sounds like something you’re makinh up on the spot. Socialists endeavour to speak in terms of concrete realities and draw conclusions from them. What is your standard of abuse? Of power? How are you comparing these things?

        btw central planning is not unique to countries run by socialists. Highly concentrated capitalism also has central planning aspects, as do their governments in times of emergency. But it is, in that case, central planning for bourgeois interests.

        Chinese government is not transparent

        How so? Tell me how the Chinese system works for, say, someone working to get a hospital built in their town.

        nor federal enough

        This sounds like America-centrism. There is nothing inherently democratic about federalism and it is often antidemocratic. If you are in the US, do you applaud the electoral college?

        for me to call it democratic or owned by the people.

        Tell me which other peripheral countries hsve done so much for their people. Tell me who has alleviated so much poverty, built so much infrastructure, and by their own hand rather than imperialism and capitalist ventures. The proof is in the doing.

        • PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          I’m genuinely apologizing because I’m only skimming this as I’m getting sleepy. and it’s a lot to go through. I can tell you took effort so apologies.

          Re: West also bad, at times worse

          I know and I agree!

          btw central planning is not unique to countries run by socialists. Highly concentrated capitalism also has central planning aspects, as do their governments in times of emergency. But it is, in that case, central planning for bourgeois interests.

          And in the case of China, it is for CCP interests. Holding elections every now and then doesn’t translate to the dictatorship of the proletariat as envisioned. By that logic, US democracy would be a dictatorship of the proletariat as well, since they hold elections every now and then.

          This sounds like America-centrism

          I do not consider america really federal, since there is massive power concentrated at the top. Same for other “federal” states like Germany

          • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            I’m genuinely apologizing because I’m only skimming this as I’m getting sleepy. and it’s a lot to go through. I can tell you took effort so apologies.

            No worries, I am not holding you to a schedule. Please take any amount of time to reply. I also won’t take it personally if you don’t reply.

            It actually isn’t much effort, I am very fast at writing.

            Re: West also bad, at times worse

            I know and I agree!

            Well that isn’t what I said, though. What I said about the West is that there is addressing the false perception of greater “free speech” in the West, which is, again, largely just chauvinism. You do not enjoy greater speech, you are just such a non-entity in terms of threatening the ruling interests. This is because those ruling interests keep you, along with the wider public, weak, docile, and hating their same enemies.

            I am also highlighting the ruling interests, not the government. This is because in these places with allegedly more “free speech”, international capital is dominant and has control over your everyday lives. It controls whether you can house and feed yourself and it censors on a constant basis. Restricting yourself solely to government censorship is a rhetorical trick used by capitalists to pretend that corporate control over life doesn’t count as oppression. Where is the comparison to private censorship, where the “free press” is actually a corporate-censored press? Have you done a comparison between the accuracy of claims from the SCMP and NYT? Just pick Palestine, see how it serves you.

            And in the case of China, it is for CCP interests. Holding elections every now and then doesn’t translate to the dictatorship of the proletariat as envisioned.

            The dictatorship of the proletariat is not specified as anything other than the proletarian class oppressing the bourgeois class because they gained power through revolution. The PRC regularly executes billionaires and uniquely reroutes funds to its people, and its poorest, to build material well-being for all, not just the richest, and certainly not just the higher-ups in the party.

            By that logic, US democracy would be a dictatorship of the proletariat as well, since they hold elections every now and then.

            The dictatorship of the proletariat does not have any governing structure specified whatsoever. It is something predicted by Marx to have certain attributes that are more about political economics, like using monopoly industry that is already centrally planned and wielding it for the good of the proletarians. Something that China has often done and is the explicit communist logic behind their conveyor belt strategy for requiring companies to have more party and government participation as they grow larger and more monopolistic.

            I do not consider america really federal, since there is massive power concentrated at the top. Same for other “federal” states like Germany

            Then I have no idea what your meaning is.