False dichotomy. Both of these things suck.
False equivalency, one of these things is fictional
Americans:
“praise the supreme leader!” - wow, brainwashing much?
“I pledge allegiance to the flag…” - Yup, this is fine.
Okay, but tbf, pledging allegiance to the flag/country is much better than to the self alleged dictator.
Is it though? We are currently seeing the forced nationalism be weaponized.
That’s because people confuse nationalism with patriotism. I love my country, which is why I want it to be better. Others love their country because it gives them permission to be worse.
To be clear, it’s still not good. I support any kid that wants to sit out for the pledge or sit or kneel for the national anthem. It should always be non-obligatory. In fact, I don’t love the word “allegiance” to begin with.
But it would be significantly worse if the pledge of allegiance was to Donal Trump. Ultimately, that’s what many people are following, but it’s not default in schools to pledge allegiance to him or anything.
I just cannot understand why somebody living in a colonial country can truly say they love their country unless they’re brainwashed or completely ignorant to its history.
I’m from Canada and we are not better, there’s just not as much of an issue of rampant nationalism disguised as “patriotism”. Our countries were built on the graves of the native inhabitants, by the hands of slaves. At no point in the history did they stop abusing natives and the descendants of slaves, they just found new ways to hide it and new names to call it (how does a prison make a profit, anyway?).
I love and am proud of my community, but that is the extent to which my pride reaches. I cannot feel proud of a country that was built on the blood of the innocent.
I love my country,
Not even sure how to respond to this kind of vague emotional ideology. When people say this kinda stuff to me in person, I back away slowly.
I want America to prosper and I want to protect American values from right-wing radicals that are in charge. I’m very passionate about it. In fact, I live in a red state and I want it to just be better and no longer radicalized by lies and hate.
I very passionately want America to heal from this illness of hate and apathy.
If that makes me a bad person, then fuck me I guess.
American values
The values of the US settler-colonial project, are native eviction, and genocide.
The values of the indigenous peoples were not considered worthy to the european settlers, so they did their best to wipe out hundreds of peoples/tribes/cultures. You either don’t know that history, or worse, you are proud of it.
I highly suggest reading both An indigenous people’s history of the US by Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, or her Not a nation of immigrants.
“American values” are freedom for a few selected individuals, this shit is ass.
The values that you probably want is incompatible with capitalism and never truly existed in America, you love the idea of it not the reality.
The US Empire is a genocidal settler-colony. It cannot be rescued from itself, it needs to be overthrown.
I don’t think it can be overthrown today; surveillance of means of communication is now total; their only restriction is the massive amount of data.
It CAN collapse in on itself, that is inevitable.
I would be delighted if I was proved wrong.
Not necessarily bad, but definitely indoctrinated, as many of us once were. The truth is a series of bitter pills, and the government and media aren’t going to offer them to you; they’re going to distract you from them. Which is easy to do, given how bitter the pills are.
I’ve been in the process of making a powerpoint-esque presentation to show to my friends who haven’t read any theory and the thought of framing and organizing it as “bitter pills” is super exciting to me. Starting out the presentation with definitions and history would’ve made them fall asleep.
Absolutely!
Ummm…how though?
Who knows one day you might get it and see they are the same motivators to for gullibles to go to war.
It doesn’t matter if it’s for their leader or the country.
It’s always for the owners of both.
nowadays it’s more accurately the same statement for both
people are praising the supreme leader in america
Per Wikipedia:
The program first emerged in the early 2000s, inspired by the credit scoring systems in other countries.
It’s almost the same thing but a different name, and is nationalized to a state system instead of like 3 or 4 companies lmao
Right wingers fear the word “social” for some reason ig
It’s also not applied at a national level, but in some areas, from what I’ve read, and is used largely against companies that try to skirt the law.
I mean, that’s also pretty awesome that there’s decent regulations as part of it(at least nominally, I don’t live there so can’t say for certain), but it seems to be primarily a banking/lending thing similar to in the US which is what a lot of jingoistic fearmongering types either completely miss or purposely ignore.
It’s decidedly not a surveillance thing, which is the funny part.
The Misconceptions section of that page is really funny. It just keeps on going with the same thing over and over but with different people and dates, it feels like a bit
Yea, China monitors a billion people in their country and assigns them a score if a citizen walks on the sidewalk correctly /s
Yea, China monitors a billion people in their country
Correct, and those abroad too.
You know the stories of secret overseas Chinese police stations were fake news, right?
I was hoping this had been debunked, any (non-CCP affiliated) sources for this?
Anything that deals more directly with the issue than the past of the founder of one associated organization? “One of the guys saying it is bad, so it isn’t true” doesn’t work well on the people I argue with.
It’s very hard to prove a negative, especially to people who want to believe, thanks to over a century of anticommunist propaganda. The burden of proof ought to be on those making claims of secret foreign police stations on their soil, an extraordinary claim. All those articles are trash and have no real evidence. And they don’t need any, because almost no Westerners demand any, because the narrative aligns with their preconception of communist states as cartoonishly evil.
It was my understanding that the existence of police stations in foreign countries is not debated, they have them. The allegation that they are used for repressive purposes beyond their stated aim of providing administrative services to citizens living abroad is what is controversial. It really seems like, when you cut all the baggage away, all we have is testimonials from expats claiming harassment and assurances from the MFA that it never happened, so I struggle to land firmly on one side of belief considering both parties have historically been loose with the truth.
Inb4 they drop the zionist media bias fact “checker” link 😂
I know this because a US government-funded “independent” think tank told me so.
assigns them a score if a citizen walks on the sidewalk correctly
Funny story about Jaywalking
The automobile lobby in the US took up the cause of labeling and scorning jaywalkers in the 1910s and early 1920s. In 1912, for instance, Popular Mechanics magazine reported that the term was current in Kansas City: “The city pedestrian who cares not for traffic regulations at street corners, but strays all over the street, crossing in the middle of the block, or attempting to save time by choosing a diagonal route across a street intersection instead of adhering to the regular crossing, is designated as a ‘jay walker,’ in Kansas City.”
In 1915, when New York City’s police commissioner Arthur Woods sought to apply the word “jaywalker” to anyone who crossed the street at mid-block, the New York Times protested, calling it “highly opprobrious” and “a truly shocking name.”
Originally in the US, the legal rule was that “all persons have an equal right in the highway, and that in exercising the right each shall take due care not to injure other users of the way”. In time, however, streets became the province of vehicular traffic, both practically and legally.
Anyway, enjoy your hyper-criminalized car culture hellscape while making spooky fingers about Evil Foreign Country.
There sure is a lot of pro-Russian propaganda from Russian state-controlled media like Sputnik News and Russia Today on this account, sprinkled in there with the downvoted and divisive liberal-hating memes.
Cope
One of us may not be coping very well.
Some folks need to hear the same thing 50 times before they fuck off
Cope
This deep into the Gaza genocide, anyone with two neurons to spark together hates liberals. Smug, conspiratorial fascists-in-denial who will spend decades helping to strangle you, then criticize the way you breathe.
If you’re pro Russia, you’re pro-genocide.
*pro Trolley Problem
Fixed.
Pure projection
1- Provided with reasoning/analogy 2- “Projection”.
Smh.
“Reasoning” lol try harder halfwit
We call that an ad hominem, sire.
An ad hominem is when an argument consists of a personal attack, this is just a personal attack dumbass, you never presented an argument worth rebutting, go back to reddit
Lmao
-You don’t even know what ad hominem means, dumbass
-This isn’t the high school debate club you peaked in
I’m well aware of the USA’s complicity in genocide. You seem to be unaware of Russia’s.
It’s really bizarre to be against genocide and unabashedly pro-Russia while spreading their insane genocidal propaganda.
I think you don’t really care about genocide, I think you’d rather just see more of it from the Republican Party because you’re a paid Russian asset.
I’m aware of liberals throwing the word genocide around in regard to shit that is demonstrably not genocide, and accusing everyone who disagrees of being a bot or a paid enemy agent. This is also projection, you are a morally bankrupt lackey of a dying empire and you are losing and you are coping poorly with it.
I wouldn’t make said accusations—and I’m not a liberal— but Russia is involved in genocide.
You did, you are, and no lol
Yeah, supporting the country whose fighting the empire, rooting out nazis, and stopping a genocide is being “for genocide”. Do you libs ever question your sources or what??
.world user
makes sense, thats probably a no then?
Russia rooting out nazis. Fighting the empire? Wild.
Putin IS a nazi. Russia IS an imperialist regime. Are we not going to talk about Russia’s imperialist attacks? Is that all chill? The attacks on Ukraine are equivalent to genocide historically.
Simply because Russia is anti-US, doesn’t make it free of guilt for much of the same actions the US takes.
You should stop trivialising the word genocide.
Trivializing? They have literal concentration camps for Uyghurs. You know, the things used for the Jewish genocide/holocaust by Hitler.
Stop defending china and call it out for its unethical actions.
There are no concentration camps? There were prisons where terrorists were rehabilitated and vocational schools. Neither of these are concentration camps. When was the last time you were in Xinjiang? Uyghur is widely spoken and all signs are in Uyghur and Chinese. There were some abuses during the crackdown on ETIM and that was bad but that has already been corrected and abuses are not genocide you should stop trivialising the word genocide.
Yea Russia is really rooting out those Nazis in Ukraine lol, maybe if you simp for Putin harder you won’t get conscripted into the meat grinder. Best of luck to you in your crusade to end genocide by spreading Russian propaganda. 👋
Yea Russia is really rooting out those Nazis in Ukraine lol,
I know liberals struggle with this concept, but saying true things sarcastically actually does not make them less true
It’s like saying, “Invading Iran is okay because their state is bad.” It’s not okay - look at how much suffering it causes. And for what? Simply replacing one oligarchy with another.
“propaganda”
Yeah, I guess thats what you’ve been conditioned to spout when encountering non-empire-sanctioned news sources ha ha!
Just as long as we’re on the same page that this post is from a pro-Russian account, which I think is pretty apparent at this point.
Silly, this is .ml for marxists. We’re all pro-China, russia and even gasp pro-DPRK because we don’t shun from news sources that havent been deemed worthy by the empire
I never understood how being a marxist has anything to do with being pro-putin, who is obviously the exact opposite of a marxist.
Very fair question. We’re not pro-Putin. We’re not even Pro-Russia. We’re pro-a few, specific actions that Russia has taken and is taking. Previously.
Marxists are certainly critical of Putin and the Russian Federation, and see it as an incredible fall from their proud and progressive soviet past. However, the biggest obstacle to socialism globally is the US Empire, and Russia is presently playing a progressive international role in undermining it, and being a valuable trading partner for countries like China, Venezuela, the DPRK, etc. Further, the biggest opposition faction to the nationalists are the communists, not the liberals, so in time it is likely they will return to socialism.
You’re conflating Marxist methodology with liberal moralism. Marxists do not offer abstract “pro/anti” judgments based on a regime’s ideology, but analyze states through their structural position in the global system. Contemporary Russia is indeed an oligarchic capitalist state, but its integration into global capitalism is asymmetric and subordinate. Its economy remains heavily dependent on raw material exports rather than high-value capital export, and it lacks the core instruments of modern imperialism: dominance over global financial institutions, reserve currency status, and the ability to enforce structural adjustment. Unlike the U.S., Russia cannot print the world’s reserve currency to finance overseas expansion or weaponize SWIFT-level financial infrastructure against rivals.
This material reality limits Russia’s capacity for classic imperialist expansion as Lenin defined it, namely, the dominance of finance capital and the export of capital as the primary mechanism of exploitation. Russia’s capital accumulation model, centered on resource rents and regional security projection, does not replicate this. It lacks the deep financial markets, technological monopoly rents, and institutional leverage that allow core imperial powers to extract surplus globally through “peaceful”(generally far from peaceful in reality) and economic means. Its military actions, therefore, function more as defensive geopolitics or regional balancing than as instruments of systematic capital expansion.
Precisely because Russia cannot compete with entrenched imperial powers on their terms, its rational strategy is to undermine unipolarity. Supporting multipolar institutions like BRICS and the SCO, opposing NATO expansion, and backing states resisting U.S. pressure are not expressions of socialist solidarity, but materially rational moves for a subordinate capitalist power seeking strategic autonomy. The objective effect (fragmenting U.S. hegemonic control) creates space for anti-imperialist struggles globally, regardless of Putin’s subjective intentions.
Our support is therefore entirely critical and conditional. We recognize that Russia’s structural position leads it, out of self-interest, to back anti-imperialist struggles, and we support those objective anti-hegemonic actions because they weaken the primary engine of global imperialist exploitation. Simultaneously, we oppose its internal reactionary politics, oligarchic structure, and any chauvinist or expansionist tactics that harm working-class solidarity. This is not a logical contradiction, it is dialectical materialism: judging policies by their concrete role in the global class struggle, not by the ideological labels of leaders. Reducing this analysis to “pro-Putin” ignores Marxism’s core method: follow the motion of material forces, not the slogans of statesmen.
Some gringo in the comments: “Something something Uyghurs, something something mass surveillance, winnie poo”
Something something
Tibetan monk sentenced to six years in prison for teaching Tibetan language
https://phayul.com/tibetan-monk-sentenced-to-six-years-in-prison-for-teaching-tibetan-language/
Liberals and real actual gaza genocide: 🥱
Liberals and fake Uyghur genocide: Real shit
“fake” Uyghur genocide, wow.
It is? Their is no evidence. It’s a fabrication invented by a German evangelical on a self proclaimed “mission from god” to destroy communism.
No, it isnt. We have geographic evidence as well as countless testimonies of the Uyghur people.
For some reason when it comes to China/Uyghur muslims, people have no issue dismissing their genocide and thinking it’s okay.
There is no genocide of Uyghurs. Uyghur genocide atrocity propaganda akin to claiming that there’s “white genocide” in South Africa, Christian genocide in Nigeria, or that Hamas sexually assaulted babies in Operation Al-Aqsa Flood.
In the case of Xinjiang, the area is crucial in the Belt and Road Initiative, so the west backed sepratist groups in order to destabilize the region. China responded with vocational programs and de-radicalization efforts, which the west then twisted into claims of “genocide.” Nevermind that the west responds to seperatism with mass violence, and thus re-education programs focused on rehabilitation are far more humane, the tool was used both for outright violence by the west into a useful narrative to feed its own citizens.
The best and most comprehensive resource I have seen so far is Qiao Collective’s Xinjiang: A Resource and Report Compilation. Qiao Collective is explicitly pro-PRC, but this is an extremely comprehensive write-up of the entire background of the events, the timeline of reports, and real and fake claims.
I also recommend reading the UN report and China’s response to it. These are the most relevant accusations and responses without delving into straight up fantasy like Adrian Zenz, professional propagandist for the Victims of Communism Foundation, does.
Tourists do go to Xinjiang all the time as well. You can watch videos like this one on YouTube, though it obviously isn’t going to be a comprehensive view of a complex situation like this.
I was in Urumqi recently enough and I can tell you this they are some of the most pro government people I have ever talked with lmao they love that ETIM was kicked out.
You have gusano testimony from the likes of Rushan Abbas (Guantanamo bay torturer) It’s not real.
Also tell me about this geographic evidence? Pictures of prisons that you decided are camps because we’re evil scary Chinese people?
I never said “you’re evil scary Chinese people”. The Chinese state however, is another story (authoritarian— but I know you’re apathetic towards authoritarianism). I realize now that this may be evoking some sort of nationalistic reaction out of you, though.
I didn’t “decide”— like I said, independent journalists and satellite imaging. And no, it’s not reducible to “Western evil scary propaganda” like you’re making it out to be.
authoritarian— but I know you’re apathetic towards authoritarianism
All governments/states are authoritarian. That is their nature. No government is excluded from this.
The difference with some governments over others is who wields that authority: the majority of working class people, or the minority of capitalist class people.
I’d prefer to live in a state that advocates for my best interests as a working class individual rather than submit to capitalists that want to extract everything that I’m worth for themselves and hoard for no good reason.
The Chinese state that has 95+% support from the population and is made up of a representative of Chinese people.
White people decided we’re evil and you just go along with it without any investigation because you’re racist and it confirms your biases
Bruh it’s .ml get out there is no reasoning with these people China is utopia that can do no wrong. They don’t want to have meaningful discussions in here its a big circlejerk for Stalin and Mao and submitting to authority. They are not revolutionaries and they did not get to this point in their lives by using actual logic
So not accepting exaggerated narratives means China is a utopia? Why do people rarely offer ordinary, policy-level criticism? There is plenty of it, but discussion often defaults to cartoonish claims instead of routine institutional analysis.
Where is the discussion of the hukou household registration system and its trade-offs?
Where is the discussion of local government reliance on land-use financing?
Where is the discussion of provincial policy experimentation and uneven implementation?
Where is the discussion of state-owned enterprises and their structural advantages and drawbacks?
Where is the discussion of demographic policy after the one-child era?
Where is the discussion of regional inequality between coastal and interior provinces?
Where is the discussion of the property sector’s role in household wealth and local budgets?
Where is the discussion of debt accumulation among provincial financing vehicles?
Where is the discussion of administrative campaign-style governance and its policy side effects?
Where is the discussion of bureaucratic incentives within the cadre evaluation system?
Where is the discussion of industrial policy prioritization and capital allocation?
Where is the discussion of urban planning constraints produced by internal migration controls?
Where is the discussion of education access differences tied to household registration?
Where is the discussion of long-term pension sustainability in an aging population?
I know where they are, in China because none of you know enough about China to have a proper discussion on any of these. All you know is spouting ridiculous talking points.
China isn’t a utopia, and does have problems. China’s problems are real, though, not invented, so discussion of China’s issues requires drawing a line between fact and fiction.
The only muslim people they suddenly “pretend” to care about because their media hides the fact that they are muslim.
Muslims everywhere else are fair game.
When will Westerners realize that the common characture of the brainwashed, thought controlled, information controlled, constantly surveiled citizen that we attribute to China/The USSR/etc… IS US?! You clutch your pearls at people in other countries potentially being treated like that but are inclined to do nothing about OUR country treating US like that.
A Russian is on an airliner heading to the US, and the American in the seat next to him asks, “So what brings you to the US?” The Russian replies, “I’m studying the American approach to propaganda.” The American says, “What propaganda?” The Russian says, “That’s what I mean.”
Snowden showed they realized but didn’t care
and the epstien files have shown us how little americans care about anything besides themselves.
You can be against US and Chinese fascism simultaneously.
In what way is China fascist? It’s a socialist country, public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state.
Surveillance and political suppression for one. Media, journalism, etc.
That’s not what fascism means, especially when these are used against capitalists most of all, and not against the working classes nearly as much. Fascism is capitalism violently entrenching itself when it finds itself in crisis, it isn’t when a socialist state uses state power to keep capitalists under control and expropriate their property.
That’s not what fascism is either lol
I wouldn’t call china fascist, though doubtlessly authoritarian. But I don’t have nearly as much info on china, it seems to me the persecution of minorities is less of a central political scapegoat and more some weird side thing. But without speaking chinese, I might be wrong. The US had plenty of fascist characteristics at this point and is rather open about the persecution.
The US is fascist because it’s in crisis. Imperialism is decaying and austerity is being brought inward.
I’m not trying to fuss over what to call something. My intended point stands.
It doesn’t, though. Socialism is not fascism, and all socialist states need to exert authority against capitalists and fascists to continue to exist. Class harmony is a lie.
My point is that the forms of oppression that occur in China aren’t exclusive to the capitalist class, and remain something I oppose.
Which stands.
Authoritarianism, violent oppression of minorites and dissenting movements, deeply ingrained surveillance state with state censorship.
China does not violently oppress minorities, and wielding state authority, censorship, and surveilance against capitalists and fascists is necessary for a socialist state, and doesn’t make it fascist. Fascism is capitalism violently defending itself from decay and solidifying bourgeois control, not proletarian.
But enough about the US.
Chinese fascism
Just say you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Nice argument.
You didn’t make one you just stated something wildly incorrect so why should I take the time to give you a well thought out response trying to explain how truly idiotic is?
I did make one, that you can oppose two things at the same time.
I could explain, but wait, you already said that authoritarianism was meaningless to you. If it doesn’t matter to you, well, seems pointless to try to convince that it is actually fascist.
You have to be a troll.
You can appose 2 things
Sure not what I took issue with. I took issue with you calling China fascist which is just an untrue statement.
Authoritarian is a pejorative. All countries and states in class society are “authoritarian” by necessity. Fascism is a specific thing arising from the tendency for the rate of profit to decline in capitalist society.
You can keep insisting I’m a troll if it helps you deal with not being able to engage with arguments.
China is authoritarian, but authoritarianism doesn’t matter to you, so that shouldn’t matter to you. Consistency, please.
And no, countries aren’t “authoritarian” by necessity. Even if some amount of policies etc that would be considered such exist everywhere, you have countries that are freer and countries that have more political suppression, censorship of media outlets, etc etc.
China does censor it’s media—political and entertainment— heavily. Just one small example.
You’re on lemmy.ml psst they really like chinese authoritarian oppression. (and I’m being honest given the current state and future of the US they’re probably better off indeed, but that doesn’t make them good)
I like it when the working classes in China wield the state against capitalists and fascists, and to ensure that social surplus is directed towards social ends above all else.
What do you actually know about China?
“authoritarian oppression” entirely meaningless when stripped of context.
All of the ID verification, posing as age verification, legislation is for better thought monitoring of social credit too.
I’m not comparing the systems or saying it’s better, but you don’t need a credit rating to get a mortgage on a home in the US and are doing yourself a disservice repeating that talking point.
If you don’t have a credit rating they’ll ask for other evidences you are able to pay off a 15-30 year loan like consistent and not missing payments on a phone, rent, utilities, internet, etc steady employment, bigger down payment. it’s called manual underwriting or a non traditional mortgage application.
Man, what world you live in?
If you treat your credit card like your debit card, you can get 3% off literally everything. As long as you don’t spend more than you make, you’ll never owe interest.
I have enough credit, I can by a whole car with the swipe of a card. I’ll never have to wonder about underwriting or proving myself. I’ve already done so to my bank. And if I ever decide to do that, I’ll have zero down and zero interest for 6 months.
Have fun with the interest rate you’ll get. You’ll inherently be a higher risk than someone with a good credit score.
I donno anything about China, but whoever made this meme certainly doesn’t know anything about the USA. The idea that “liberals” or anyone else (??) are high-fiving themselves over a credit score. lol
Marxists-Leninists (as in, the ML in lemmy.ml) use the term “liberals” to describe anyone living under a Western capitalist system. Especially MLs on Lemmy, they consider any username not from the Tankie Triad to be liberal (or anarchist, which is somehow worse).
It’s really dumb, possibly even a psyop. Because according to militant left the true communism has never been achieved, therefore everyone on earth is under a western capitalist system
First, let’s be precise about terms: capitalism is defined by private ownership of the means of production, profit-driven accumulation, and wage labor; socialism is defined by social ownership (state, collective, or cooperative), planning mechanisms, and the subordination of remaining market forces to developmental and social goals. They are distinct modes of production, not a binary where anything short of stateless communism “counts” as capitalism.
Second, “Western capitalism” isn’t a universal default, it specifically describes the Euro-Amerikan core and its integrated vassals (NATO, Five Eyes, dependent economies). That system is hegemonic, but it is not total. Russia, for instance, operates a distinct sovereign-capitalist model: not socialist, but explicitly de-linked from Western financial architecture and actively contesting unipolar dominance.
Third, China, Cuba, Laos, and Vietnam are explicitly in the early stages of the socialist transitionary period. Their frameworks (especially China’s “primary stage of socialism”) theorize that underdeveloped socialist states must develop productive forces, utilize regulated markets, and engage globally while maintaining proletarian state power and public ownership of commanding heights. This isn’t “capitalism with red flags”; it’s a materialist strategy to build the basis for higher-stage socialism. Dismissing these distinctions because communism hasn’t been “achieved” yet misunderstands dialectics: transition is a process, not an event. You don’t call a bridge under construction meaningless because it has yet to reach the other side.
This is nonsense. Communism has not been achieved, but socialism absolutely has. Communism has not been achieved not for lack of trying, but because it is a post-socialist system. There’s no psyop.
Profoundly wrong statement.
First because that’s not how Marxist-Leninists use the word ‘liberal’, that’s a definition you just made up while ignoring decades of literature. Second, because it implies that is not what the word actually means to literally everyone, not just Leninists or even just socialists, everywhere on the planet with the exception of the US liberal duopoly.
Third, because it implies people are calling you a liberal because of your instance, and not because of your shit takes.
The ML usage of the term liberal comes from Classical Liberalism, right? Please correct me.
Also I hate how y’all think I’m personally evil because I haven’t Read Theory. Y’all are my first exposure to MLs and I don’t have any control over what my society has taught me. (I’m not defending what my society has taught me, I’ve been deconstructing for a long time and not stopping.)
Is naivete a sin?
Is naivete a sin?
No investigation no right to speak is a core part of MarxistLeninist thought as it has evolved. Naivete is not “a sin” but if you haven’t researched a topic you shouldn’t speak on it.
As Chairman Mao put it:
Unless you have investigated a problem, you will be deprived of the right to speak on it. Isn’t that too harsh? Not in the least. When you have not probed into a problem, into the present facts and its past history, and know nothing of its essentials, whatever you say about it will undoubtedly be nonsense. Talking nonsense solves no problems, as everyone knows, so why is it unjust to deprive you of the right to speak? Quite a few comrades always keep their eyes shut and talk nonsense, and for a Communist that is disgraceful. How can a Communist keep his eyes shut and talk nonsense?
It won’t do!
It won’t do!
You must investigate!
You must not talk nonsense!
“liberal” denotes adherence to bourgeois democracy and capitalist property relations, (pro bourgeois democracy and private property)
The critique of certain “anarchists” is that they guise reactionary politics in radical language, which aids capitalism.
No? I’m an ML and I live in a capitalist country. Further, liberals are absolutely worse than anarchists.
I’ll stand corrected on the anarchist comment. But if one lives in a capitalist country, one inevitably supports capitalism, right? Even if it’s against their will.
This sounds more and more like Original Sin.
Existing within capitalism does not mean you cannot work to overthrow it and must ideologically support it by espousing liberal talking points.
Where are progressives on that scale? Oh, and do fascists, I definitely want to know how a fascist stacks up against a liberal!
The formula for a fascist is liberal plus time, multiplied by war
If you’re not anti capitalist and anti bourgeois democracy even if you’re “progressive” you’re just a flavour of liberal. Fascists are obviously worse than liberals although they tend to agree on a surprising amount of things when push comes to shove unfortunately. Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds is a widespread phrase for a reason.
“Progressive” doesn’t really mean anything beyond “left of establishment democrats.” They range from liberal to socialist. Fascists are a twin of liberalism, worse but fundamentally connected.
WOOOSH!
They’re high-fiving themselves about being able to buy a house. DUR.
Under capitalism basic human needs are allocated only to the most privileged.
Many many libs celebrate their participation in this privilege, especially in terms of housing.
State-enforced privilege is basically the entire goal of liberalism.
People like thay exist. In the same way that 40 year olds high five themselves for still fitting into the pants they wore in hs.
The only ones celebrating credit scores as a concept are lenders, the true capitalists
Noone actually forces you to live in debt. It should be last resort, but people in US finance everything
Noone actually forces you to live in debt
Oh damn I didn’t know they made housing and healthcare free, that’s dope as fuck
Come on like half of car sales in US are financed.
You know that Healthcare and housing is the last resort I’m talking about - where you have no other option.
The US is reliant on cars, but many people cannot afford buying them outright or low-interest loans. This is by design, not choice.
Bullshit. Used car market exists since the invention of a car. If you need a vehicle that will drive your ass from point A to the point B you absolutely have no need to buy a brand new one.
The used car market is volitile, regional, and often close to new in price. Stop blaming systemic issues on actions of individuals. I’m not saying that it’s impossible for one to make poor financial decisions, but instead that the very system is designed around maximizing profits squeezed from the working classes.
No you don’t understand you can just become homeless and then let yourself die of preventable causes.
No you don’t understand you can just become homeless
Isn’t that illegal in the US
Only if you insist on sleeping.
Sleeping is authoritarian
I wouldn’t be surprised but I am neither amerikkkan nor have I looked into that.
but people in US finance everything
Damn I wonder why they do that. Must have nothing to do poverty. /s
Two kinds of people in the comments: those who think credit scores are bad, and those who think social credit systems are good
Both are bad???
one of them doesn’t even fucking exist
Start editing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_credit_system
citing the natopedia article as if it’s an actual source lol
i’ve lived in china; i don’t need to edit shit.
They didn’t even read the first section of the article they linked.
There have been widespread misconceptions in media reports that China operates a unitary social credit “score” based on individuals’ behavior, leading to punishments if the score is too low or rewards if the score is high.
Sure, let’s say it doesn’t since I admittedly haven’t looked into this in painful detail. However, this meme seems to suggest that if it did exist, then it would be perfectly fine on the virtue that credit scores exist in America. Aka, whataboutism.
Since Germany made concentration camps under the third reich that it isn’t that bad when America does it. At least by this logic. Guess it’s impossible to be against two things at once. Though I hope I’m just misinterpreting the point
That’s not what “whataboutism” is. This isn’t a structured debate where we are limited to one topic, it’s a conversation… and we’re allowed to use examples and compare like to like, you do it, I do it, every human on Earth does it every day.
Sure, you’re allowed to call this and everything else ‘whataboutism’, I don’t think you should be given a “whataboutism score” wherein those with the highest scores are avoided by reasonable people.
I await your charge of gaslighting eagerly
The meme is pointing out hypocrisy among those in America. Its common to hear them mock China for having a social credit score system, while apparently not realizing they have exactly that with credit monitoring companies.
This is all made more ridiculous by the fact that there is no social credit score in China as Americans understand it.
The joke is that Americans brag and call everyone else barbarians, when they themselves are the barbarians. Its pure projection to inflate the massive American ego.
Exactly my thoughts. People just mass downvote into oblivion, no reasoning provided.
Reasoning has been provided all over this thread, including by users from instances you cannot see because Lemmy.world censored them from your view.
Where do you get your news from? Not going to continue to argue, but I’m just curious
No one place, I see the same mainstream western news as everyone, I just also read articles from outside the west as well, and non-mainstream sources too.
Yeah, I just wonder which sources are “from outside the west” since I’m trying my best to break my echo chamber
CGTN is pretty mainstream for news from China, they have English news. The Cradle is typically decent on reporting from the Middle East. For western and glonal news from a communist angle, BreakThrough News and Geopolitical Economy Report are both good.
Here’s some comparison:
- In both USA and china you can’t buy a ticket to a fast train if you’re credit score is bad. In china there is direct ban, in USA there is no fast Train.
- In china, this also applies to flight tickets. Basically if you have bad social credit, you are kinda fucked in almost anything in china including apointment to government services. USA it’s mostly tied to taking new loans or getting a new house or renting an apartment (?). Does not have actual effect on your ability to purchase flight tickets.
- In China they can check your phone (for images) and your online activity is quite accessible to the government. The checks can happen not only in international borders but also in inter regional borders. In USA, i know it’s a thing for foreigners during entrance to USA, not sure how is it for the citizens.
- In China you have to give away all your data (as a company), regardless of where that data is stored, if the government or the communist party requests it. They are technically different entities but practically the same entity. Failure to do so will fuck up your social credit. In USA you also have to hand over all your data (as a company) if the government asks regardless of where it is stored (since the CLOUD act), but hey at least you’re not handing over to the commies and it will probably not have any effect on your credit score.
- In china there is an app that notifies people of other people with poor social credit so they can generally avoid them. USA hasn’t invented that YET, although people from other political party are usually considered subhuman and beneath themselves and someone is looking.
This comparison mixes a few real policies with a lot of exaggeration. For example, the train and flight issue people always bring up is not about having a vague “bad social credit score.” What actually exists is a court enforcement measure. If someone refuses to comply with an effective court judgment (most commonly paying a debt or damages) the court can place them on the judgment-defaulter list (失信被执行人) and issue a high-consumption restriction (限制高消费). That mainly blocks luxury consumption like flights, first-class rail seats, and luxury hotels until the court order is fulfilled. The purpose is simply to pressure people to comply with the judgment and protect the creditor’s rights (why should sleazy business people who don’t pay their debts get to live lavishly).
Because of that, the claim that “if you have bad social credit you’re basically locked out of everything” is misleading. These restrictions target specific high-end consumption, not normal daily life. Even Chinese legal explanations make clear that they are meant to restrict non-essential spending such as flying, luxury hotels, expensive travel, etc., rather than basic living or ordinary transportation.
The surveillance point is also mixing separate issues. China does have strong state monitoring powers and extensive digital infrastructure, but that is not what the court enforcement blacklist system is. The travel restrictions and blacklists people talk about come from civil enforcement procedures in the courts, not from scanning someone’s phone or some universal personal “score.”
The same confusion shows up in the company data point. China has strict data and cybersecurity laws, but those are regulatory and national security frameworks. They are not the mechanism that puts someone on the judgment-defaulter list. That list exists specifically because someone ignored a legally binding court ruling, not because they refused to hand over corporate data.
And the idea that there is some nationwide app warning citizens about people with low “social credit” is another exaggeration. What actually exists are court databases of judgment defaulters, sometimes publicly searchable, similar to debtor registries in many legal systems. Again, the target is people who lost a case and then refused to comply with the ruling.
So the reality is much more mundane than the viral version. China absolutely has strong enforcement tools, but the famous travel bans people cite are mainly a judicial enforcement mechanism against people who refuse to comply with court judgments, not a universal social-credit score controlling everyone’s daily life.
Thanks for your post, your explanations are appreciated!
Don’t answer if annoying, sorry for rudeness, but do Chinese high-level officials openly live lavishly and flaunt their wealth like US leadership?
do Chinese high-level officials openly live lavishly and flaunt their wealth
How many Chinese high-level officials have you seen on yachts?
flaunt their wealth like US leadership?
The real leadership in the US isn’t the politicians; it’s the capitalists who own them.
Ahh I see. I read about and watched few documentaries about Xu Xiadong who criticized kungfu masters and lost social credit (among other things) and couldn’t rent, own property, stay in certain hotels, travel on high speed rail, or buy plane tickets. I guess that was not true then.
The bit about data handover. I guess the center for internet security is misinformed so is the australian strategic policy institute, department of homeland security, and NCSC.
About the app, BBC is probably where it comes from, it’s more for debtors and not with people with bad social credit but I suppose there is an overlap. So this didn’t make it pass the trial phase?
The Xu Xiaodong case actually illustrates the exact point I was making. He wasn’t punished for “criticizing kung fu masters” or for having the wrong opinions. What happened is that he lost a defamation lawsuit and the court ordered him to apologize and pay damages. He refused to comply with the ruling, and because of that he was placed on the judgment-defaulter list (失信被执行人). Chinese reporting describes the reason as “有履行能力而拒不履行生效法律文书确定义务”, having the ability to comply with a court judgment but refusing to do so. Once someone is on that list, courts can impose high-consumption restrictions (限制高消费), which include things like flights, certain high-speed rail tickets, and luxury hotels until the judgment is fulfilled. In other words, the trigger was refusing to carry out a court order, not some general punishment for speech.
On the data issue, you’re citing reports from Western government-linked think tanks and security NGOs, which obviously approach the topic from a national security perspective. China’s cybersecurity and data laws (like the Cybersecurity Law and Data Security Law) exist because the state wants control over critical data flows, infrastructure security, and cross-border data transfer. That approach isn’t unique in principle; governments everywhere are tightening control over data because it has become a strategic resource. But those laws are regulatory frameworks about data governance, not mechanisms that automatically “ruin someone’s social credit.” The think-tank papers you cited are describing geopolitical risk concerns, not explaining how the Chinese court enforcement system actually works.
On the app point, what the BBC article referred to were tools connected to the court defaulter database, sometimes nicknamed things like a “laolai map.” That’s basically a searchable database of people who have lost a case and then refused to comply with the judgment, which courts use to pressure them to comply. Many countries have debtor registries or public enforcement records; the difference here is mostly presentation. Western coverage often framed it as part of a sinister “social credit” ecosystem when in reality it was tied to a specific court enforcement list, not a universal citizen score. It’s good to have a database of those who have defrauded people. And to be honest, the BBC has a long history of framing Chinese policy in a particular narrative, so it’s not surprising that nuance tends to disappear.
The reality is that some of these mechanisms absolutely exist, but how they work, who they apply to, and what they actually do is often somewhere between heavy exaggeration and outright fantasy in viral discussions. What exists in practice is a mixture of court enforcement lists, regulatory blacklists, and sector-specific compliance systems. Turning that into a story about every citizen having a constantly changing “social credit score” controlling their life is a much simpler narrative, but it’s not how the underlying policies are actually structured.
I see, that was the result of not following court orders. So not complying with court orders will prevent you from these things (flights, high speed rail tickets, and luxury hotels?). Some institutes also report rent or purchase property, are those also restricted when you don’t comply with court order? What if you already own property? I am only asking to know.
I guess this questions are more about authoritarian rather than soical credits. How about xiaodong’s account being wiped 9 times was it (?) for having a viewpoint against the government. Is that somehow illegal and hence banned?
And about censorship. Wikipedia has a list of things that is banned from china including the marxist internet archive and Kanzhongguo, how much of that is true?
There is also one funny things that maybe you can shed some light on. There was this joke that if you get spam call from china, you can text them “Tiananmen Square and June 4, 1989 (1989年6月天安门广场屠杀)” or something about Taiwan being a country and their internet will be cut and they will be arrest or something x’D. I suppose it’s only a meme but is there some truth to it, memes do come from somewhere right?
On the property point, it’s the same principle as the other restrictions. When someone refuses to comply with a court judgment and is placed under high-consumption restrictions (限制高消费), the court can restrict certain forms of luxury spending, which can include purchasing additional real estate or carrying out non-essential renovations until the debt or judgment is fulfilled. The idea is that if someone owes money according to a court ruling, they should not be spending large amounts on luxury consumption before complying. Existing property is not automatically taken just because someone is on the list, although assets can be enforced as part of normal debt collection(just as in every other country).
As for Xu Xiaodong’s accounts being wiped, that situation was tied to the series of lawsuits and disputes he became involved in, along with platform moderation rules. That falls under content moderation and legal disputes on private platforms, not the court enforcement mechanism we were discussing earlier.
The blocked-website lists you see online are a very mixed bag. Some sites are inaccessible because of political or regulatory issues, but many cases come down to compliance requirements, such as rules around data protection, licensing, and the requirement for companies handling Chinese user data to host or manage that data within China’s regulatory framework. When companies choose not to comply with those requirements, their services often simply do not operate in the mainland market.
And that meme about texting someone “Tiananmen 1989” to get them arrested is honestly pretty ugly. It basically jokes about condemning random Chinese people to some vague punishment for the sake of a punchline, which is a pretty dehumanizing way to talk about an entire population. Fortunately it’s also just a meme, sending a phrase like that to someone does not magically cut their internet or get them arrested.
Thank you for taking time to answer.
One additional question; what do you mean by political or regulatory issue? You mean that is a grounds for something to be banned? Also who dictates that certain thing is ban-able from political or regulatory issue and what is the threshold?
I meant that internet content in China is governed by formal laws and regulations, mainly enforced by the Cyberspace Administration of China (国家网信办) and related regulators. Chinese rules such as the 《网络信息内容生态治理规定》 classify online information and require platforms to prohibit illegal content and prevent harmful content, including material that endangers national security, spreads rumors that disrupt social order, promotes extremism or violence, or infringes on others’ rights. Platforms are legally required to monitor and remove such content and regulators can order services restricted or removed if they violate these rules.
The existence of this infamous app should be easy to prove. I have never seen anything but armchair reddit-tier experts making bold claims about.
I agree, and I would really want to know. The only “news” I found is the tests from Heinan province in 2019 but I couldn’t find anything after that. But testing of this system (introduced by the government), where you can see and report debtors itself feels quite scary and authoritarian to me.
Do you have sources for any of these claims?
I put some links in the comments below. But most of the ‘information’ I have is from news and documentaries about Xu Xiaodong. You can check the wikpeida article, but it’s just wikpedia.
I also know of someone who went to tibet as a tourist through Nepal. Their phone had to be surrendered for thorough checking, they apparently painstakingly checked all images. I don’t expect anybody to believe this as I can’t provide proof that it did happen.
Your main source is ASPI, a far right war-hawk australian defense industry think tank.
And your source is mintpressnews.
Also it’s not my main source. You just cherry picked one. Ok sure mybad on that, lets diregard that one. What about CIS, DHS, and NCSC?
Also BBC. Let’s also add wikipedia [1] [2] because why not.
And do we want to talk about censorship? Sounds like something an authoritarian regime does.
Let’s also add wikipedia
I am once again begging liberals to learn how sources work
You’ve got nothing and you know it
I concede. There is no social credit, people not being allowed to travel in trains, rent or buy property, get government appointment is a myth. The Chinese government cannot compel any company to handover data. There is no censorship on china, no websites are banned there. You can criticize the government as much as you want without repercussions. People from Tibet have equal rights and citizenship of China. Ughyurs are not being oppressed, neither are the fallongongs who are just a cult
If anybody believes otherwise, it’s a hoax by the west.
Cheap sarcasm won’t bolster your case.
China’s social credit score system exists because after their rapid urbanization the business community started complaining that they needed a way to know who can be trusted to pay back loans. At the same time the cities were full of people who were used to knowing all their neighbors and were now surrounded by strangers that they didn’t trust. The Chinese government framed both of these problems as the same thing - a crisis of trust - and presented the social credit score as the solution. It was just a copy of the United States’ credit score system but dressed up in socialist buzzwords to make it more palatable to the people, so it was really just meant to solve the first problem while pretending to solve the latter. The “social” aspects of the social credit score (subtracting points when someone commits a crime, public disturbance, etc.) are inconsistently applied across various localities and practically vestigial, most Chinese are not even aware that they exist. It’s ironic that this socialist coat of paint on one of the most capitalistic elements in the Chinese economy makes Americans think it’s dystopian, while in reality the most dystopian parts of it are the ways that it’s identical to our credit system.
That is pretty wild. I didn’t know any of this … I just thought “communist dystopia is dystopian”. The fact that you can take a hit to the credit score for engaging in protests and demonstrations is still scary … no one show this to Republicans.
The fact that you can take a hit to the credit score for engaging in protests and demonstrations is still scary
I was saying that this sort of thing actually doesn’t really happen. The social credit score for the most part is just an ordinary credit score and is only meaningfully affected by finances. Some localities made an attempt at implementing the “social” aspects of the system and subtract small amounts for certain criminal offenses, but it barely makes a difference.
Engaging in protests and demonstrations gets you the same thing it gets you here; tear gas, pepper balls, beatings, and possibly prison time & a criminal record. The hysteria around the social credit system is very silly when the actual dystopian shit is so glaringly obvious, and occurs in both China and the US.
Engaging in protests and demonstrations gets you the same thing it gets you here; tear gas, pepper balls, beatings, and possibly prison time & a criminal record.
Not entirely false, but the scale & severity is much worse in the US, and they’re ramping up for more.
I cannot emphasize enough how much air would be sucked out of our propaganda overnight if china just fucking uncensored the internet and truly protected freedom of speech and information.
I mean judging by how cooked the brains of so many western people are with internet conspiracies like qanon, I’m not sure that would be the result of deregulation
The PRC would be incredibly naive to let US tech companies in, and take and hoover over their social media landscape, like so many other countries have done. For example India’s most popular communications platform, is facebook. The US effectively controls the social media of a country many times larger than itself, and can influence it whatever way it wants, as well as spy on every person who uses it.
For those who want to view US-run tech sites in the PRC, they can of course via VPNs which are completely legal, but that friction is very worthwhile for encouraging home-run alternatives, and preventing mass surveillance by an evil empire.
Just orientalist vibes, no sources in sight.
Why don’t you correct me instead of marking my comment as bigotry and removing it? I said that China’s social credit system is just an ordinary credit system much like ours, and that is bigotry how, exactly? Explain it to me.
It’s wild, you don’t even have to say anything bad about China to piss you off, you just have to talk about it neutrally without constantly praising it as a socialist utopia.
Here’s some sources, some even from far-right US journals that have looked into it. It has more to do with regulating businesses and execs found to be in violation anti-trust laws.
It’s really just standard anti-trust legislation, IE things the US used to do before 1980s when they let finance capital take over.
- The US’s credit score system is vastly more influential and detrimental to a majority of its population than China’s social credit system, which largely doesn’t even exist, and where it does exist it is only used to target businesses.
- China’s Social Credit System is more about regulating businesses, and execs who are found to be in violation of anti-trust laws.
If you’re going to mischaracterize it in the future, at least post some sources.
