All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[PwrdOn]

Oh, whoops. My knowledge of Asian history is LITERALLY non-existent.

Not to come off as a smug douche or anything, but if you want to talk about communism I think you need to have at least a rudimentary understanding of Asian history and politics, given that it's the one continent where communism has some actual long term traction and shows no signs of going away anytime soon. Just to start, you may want to look a bit at how each of the communist regimes that still exists there grew up in resistance to and still draws energy from the terrible legacy of Western colonialism, and how the realistic alternative to communism is not Western style liberal democracy but a rather vile form of ultranationalistic corporatism.

This is immensely tone deaf given what we know about both of those governments recently. Putin and Xi don't deserve praise or omission from the conversation. This ignores a large swath of recent history, of them hurting their own citizens and acting badly abroad (Ukraine, Belt and Road Initiative, Trump, Brexit). Both countries have troubles with oligarchs of their own, and authoritarian tendencies (press and opposition leaders being assassinated, Muslim genocide).

Did you actually read what I typed? My point was that both Putin and Xi face a ton of opposition at home, except that we rarely ever hear about this because it just so happens that most of the dissidents are Marxists who want a return to TRUE communism rather than the weird mix of state capitalism and nationalism that both countries have now. Instead we either assume that both countries are composed entirely of brainwashed drones who all think and act alike, or we keep giving a voice to the same two dozen people or so over there that genuinely believe that the best way forward for those countries is to bend the knee to the USA and copy how we do things. And just to go down your list of talking points:

Ukraine - EVERYTHING that's wrong with Russia is just as bad or worse in Ukraine, this is why the media doesn't really report on it anymore because there's no good vs. evil narrative to be had.
Belt and Road - Is wrong how exactly?
Trump - Are you really going to blame Russia for this? They might have helped him win the election but they aren't responsible for turning our country into a rat's nest of racism and xenophobia, we did that to ourselves.
Brexit - Again, how is Russia to blame for this? This was, as the Brits say, an own goal.
Press Assassinations - You know, if someone had just drone striked Roger Ailes or Rupert Murdoch, it would probably have been a net positive to the world given just how much damage their "news" organizations do on a regular basis.
Muslim genocide - Where is this happening? If you're talking about the Uighur camps there is no evidence that people are sent there to be killed.

Like this is why we can't have a mature conversation about socialism these days, every time it gets brought up people always try to bring up the absolute worst examples along with that old favorite, "well if you love communist countries so much why don't you just move there and see how much you like it?!" And especially the fact that the supposed left wing party in the US is more interested in attacking candidate who, if we're being honest, is a relatively mild socialist who isn't advocating for anything that would shake up the foundations of our economy in the way that a true Marxist would want, rather than focusing their energy on, I dunno, actually trying to beat Trump, is telling.

[Vegan Daddy]

Shocker, the poster who happily mis-labels LGBT+ people is happy the most successful gay candidate in primary history has dropped out. Quelle surprisé.

The rich white gays are devastated.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Ah, now you're starting to sound like a Maoist. Mao predicted exactly this, that when the proletariat seized power it would go to their heads and they eventually would transform into a new bourgeois class, which is why he advocated this idea of a permanent revolution where those who have put themselves at the top of society must continuously be cast down and put in their place. Now of course this isn't to defend Mao's solution of killing everyone who got too big for their britches, but seeing how enthusiastically the Chinese communists have embraced markets and basically forsaken any claim of standing for the rights of the working class, you can't say that he didn't have some legitimate concerns. And interestingly enough, the way that people always bring up Tiananmen Square like it's some dramatic indictment of communism's cruelty and savagery, you would never realize that most of the protesters were hardly adherents of Western liberal democracy but rather committed Marxists, who thought that the party had pivoted too far from its ideals in the pursuit of foreign capital.

You're openly supporting Mao now? Are you listening to yourself?

People don't dislike the massacre because they think the protesters sympathised with the West, they disliked it because they were massacred for simply protesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

Trotsky's "continuous revolution" is a disastrous ideology.

[PwrdOn]

You're openly supporting Mao now? Are you listening to yourself?

People don't dislike the massacre because they think the protesters sympathised with the West, they disliked it because they were massacred for simply protesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward

Trotsky's "continuous revolution" is a disastrous ideology.

So you're against an ideology of mass uprisings, but you also are against using state power to suppress protests? The Tiananmen protests were certainly NOT peaceful if that's what you were thinking. I guess you just want to live in a society where people have the right to protest but simply choose not to because they're too distracted by bread and circuses to put their lives on the line. Also, the Great Leap Forward was mostly a failure of economic mismanagement and wasn't really a political event, what you were probably thinking of was the Cultural Revolution.

[jetengine]

Ah I see. Thank-you, that's very informative





Agreed.


But it does mean that the vile hate and nastiness you're seeing in such prolific numbers from Sanders acolytes, resulting in pushing people away, is to help Trump (whether it's in the third parities personal interests rather than directly wanting Trump is immaterial, the result is the same). Which was covered in my first point.

So we agree, the only possible motive for the aggressive, and uncontrollable hate from Sanders supporters is:
- secret Trump-inclined fake
- watching the world burn
- (utter stupidity)
[and that last one isn't so much a motive, as an unintentional act]

Not to be "that guy" but did you really need to spend three posts going "REALLY? No other reason? REALLY? You can't see the third option? REALLY?" when... I actually covered that reason in my very first point.
#truthbombOFLOVE


I don't remember that? After the London Bridge attack?


I mean... I see what you're saying in the "we don't hear from the poor" (which is case across history, as records are only kept of the movers and shakers) but I just... don't see any evidence that the poor in Russia and China are just doing so good. And loving life under their government (I will say, I know next to nothing about Cuba)

Yes, after the London Bridge attack a fake tweet was spread throughout the Conservative media sphere first before hitting the internet wholesale. It was Corbyn saying the London Police had killed a man today with the implication being either was ok with him being a terrorist or he cared more about the killing then the terrorist part, both of which tie in with the "Corbyns a terrorist sympathiser l" hogwash. Now I'm not saying Corbyn didn't cause his own problems, but don't bloody tell me that its all his own fault when vile **** like that is happening.

[PwrdOn]

Agreed. And hey... maybe he can be Biden's VP It certainly won't hurt his career going out still doing well; and he's young, he'll have another shot. But agreed about an opponent to Trump. His military background would have helped a lot, and siphoned of a little Republican support who are military inclined. And the fact he's not a millionaire could have appealed to the working class more (again, Republican base). Either way, he did good. Made history. No matter what, he was a trailblazer. Got firther than any openly gay candidate before him. Only(?) openly gay candidate to win a state in the primaries. Only openly gay candidate to make it to Top 2 in New Hampshire. It was a very noble effort.

Nobody's gonna be Biden's VP because Biden won't win. Buttigieg made a calculated decision here, he knew that he was gonna have a poor showing on Super Tuesday and rather than having that stain his political star for future runs, he chose to bow out with dignity, which I can respect. Now if he comes out and decides to endorse Bloomberg or something like that, then I'm going right back to hating him, but I suspect he will not do that because he wants to run for president again in the future and will be wary of attaching his name to a losing cause.

[Steel Inquisitor]

So you're against an ideology of mass uprisings, but you also are against using state power to suppress protests? The Tiananmen protests were certainly NOT peaceful if that's what you were thinking. I guess you just want to live in a society where people have the right to protest but simply choose not to because they're too distracted by bread and circuses to put their lives on the line.

I'm not the one supporting Communist regimes in this conversation. I'm against states abusing their power to crush their people, and I'm not against protests, I simply think they're not very useful by themselves. They certainly haven't provided relief in the West. People protest in the West regularly, my political opinions are more nuanced than your attempt to categorise whatever I believe in in hyperbolic terms. There are more to politics than Communism/ socialism and conservatism.

Also, the Great Leap Forward was mostly a failure of economic mismanagement and wasn't really a political event, what you were probably thinking of was the Cultural Revolution.

Calling that a "failure" is an understatement. It was a program which resulted in 45 millions deaths due to famine. The Cultural Revolution was something on top of that, both were disasters in policy.

[Theleviathan]

This socialism/communism conversation is kind of tired. Socialism will always create the power vacuum that creates dictatorships and suppression. Human nature. Yeah, it sucks, but that's why even Bernie isn't really a socialist.

To paraphrase....capitalism is the worst system, except for all the other ones.

[PwrdOn]

I'm not the one supporting Communist regimes in this conversation. I'm against states abusing their power to crush their people, and I'm not against protests, I simply think they're not very useful by themselves. They certainly haven't provided relief in the West. People protest in the West regularly, my political opinions are more nuanced than your attempt to categorise whatever I believe in in hyperbolic terms. There are more to politics than Communism/ socialism and conservatism.

Calling that a "failure" is an understatement. It was a program which resulted in 45 millions deaths due to famine. The Cultural Revolution was something on top of that, both were disasters in policy.

That is very much the rub though, right? If you look at Occupy, or Black Lives Matter, or the Womens' Marches, or the Extinction Rebellion, I'm sure all of those protesters sincerely believe in what they're fighting for and the media always covers them like they are some huge watershed moment, but really, what has come out of any of those movements? The consistent strand here is that none of them threaten to upset the apple cart in any significant way, they are demanding change but there are no repercussions if they don't get what they want, which means that the powers that be can safely ignore them.

Also, I'm not sure what to tell you, but "don't grow any food so everyone starves" isn't anywhere to be found either in the the Communist Manifesto or the Little Red Book. China had a big population to feed, and also needed to rapidly industrialize to compete economically, but didn't have the resources to do both. Mao tried anyway, and failed spectacularly. That's it, there was no sinister agenda at work there.

[Darkspellmaster]

Buttigieg is out

Well I was off by one. Though this is going to be interesting going into Super Tuesday.

[Malvolio]

This socialism/communism conversation is kind of tired. Socialism will always create the power vacuum that creates dictatorships and suppression. Human nature. Yeah, it sucks, but that's why even Bernie isn't really a socialist.

To paraphrase....capitalism is the worst system, except for all the other ones.

Robin Quivers made a similar point on the Howard Stern Show last week. Socialism is a good idea in theory, but too many people, especially in America, don't like the government telling them what to do or how to spend their money. They'd rather occasionally give a few dollars to charity and pat themselves on the back for being so kind-hearted.

[TriggerWarning]

Oh I hope not. I'd like whoever these str8, white male candidates are, to pick a non-straight, white male as their VP. Give a little love to minorities that are carrying the party.

This doesn't help him at all unless that minority wins him a swing state. Minorities already like Biden the most of the candidates and given their hate of Trump they are going to vote en masse for the dem nominee regardless. So while it might please that demographic they were already going to vote for him anyway. For someone like Sanders, who has obvious struggles connecting with minorities, it would make sense but not for Biden whose most important thing is going to be winning a swing state that Trump won in 2016 like Ohio which is why I said Sherrod Brown. If for some reason they think Texas might be in play then someone like Julian Castro would make sense. If California was in doubt (its not) then Kamala Harris makes sense.

[Theleviathan]

Robin Quivers made a similar point on the Howard Stern Show last week. Socialism is a good idea in theory, but too many people, especially in America, don't like the government telling them what to do or how to spend their money. They'd rather occasionally give a few dollars to charity and pat themselves on the back for being so kind-hearted.

I mean, there's a reason every single socialistic government structure has ended poorly. Or at least ended up as a dictatorship and suppression of the citizenry. If you make everything equal, some asshat is going to see opportunity and amass power.

Capitalism, I believe, eventually leads to powerful interests buying their way into government influence but it takes much longer and is less pervasively damaging. Plus it does much more to lift the wealth and advancement of a society. So even with the problems in capitalism that we are very much in the thick of, it's still a vastly superior system.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

I mean, there's a reason every single socialistic government structure has ended poorly. Or at least ended up as a dictatorship and suppression of the citizenry. If you make everything equal, some asshat is going to see opportunity and amass power.

Capitalism, I believe, eventually leads to powerful interests buying their way into government influence but it takes much longer and is less pervasively damaging. Plus it does much more to lift the wealth and advancement of a society. So even with the problems in capitalism that we are very much in the thick of, it's still a vastly superior system.

This is wrong on every level.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

Buttigieg is out

Excellent news.

In a lot of ways, Mayo Pete represented the worst of American politics.