Nuttula [comrade/them]
I hope the OP isn’t serious. Pretty sure the sample size on most of those countries is like half a dozen people. I mean where the fuck do you go to find some Peruvian food without going so completely out of your way. And the more out of your way you have to go to eat something the more likely it is you will have some extreme opinion about it(e.g you ate it because you were with a friend that forced you, or you had this unique opportunity to eat at some exotic restaurant once but the experience was either great or horrible).
In short I would refrain from being a bigot and calling entire nations racist because the whole dozen or so people surveyed by this random western said they didn’t like [insert random cousine from country across the planet here].
I mean if you actually look at this graph all you are seeing is that the Indonisia/Thai/China/Japan all dislike everything that isn’t local or completely generic western(Italian = pizza, American = McDonald).
Pretty sure the USSR for this person is just modern Russia with a different color theme.
And believe me I’m not even a “uyghur genocide is 100% non-existent” type either like many on here.
You are perfectly in your right to be displeased about the situation, personally I don’t think any of this is “ideal”. But genocide is not a sliding scale. You can’t genocide “less” or “more”. It is either happening or it isn’t, and it almost certainly isn’t.
In a perfect world it wouldn’t be necessary to find religious extremists and reeducate them. In a perfect world the revolution would be inherently convincing to everyone the moment it happens. This goes for fascists, capitalists, religious extremists etc…
Either you do something which you believe is the best choice, or you do nothing or worse, take the worst option available. The situation in Xinjiang was not something a government could just ignore.. Content warning :graphic and uncomfortable but really really important to watch if you haven’t.
People either forget or are not aware that the issue here is not just “religious extremism” as if the party wants to do away with Muslims or whatever.
But that there is actual terrorism on a large scale that was going on for decades. Even worse still many of these terrorists ended up fighting for ISIS, like it or not contributing to a larger regional problem.
I can understand why a Westerner wants to be on the safe side, I mean who wants to be caught defending genocide right?
But my personal reasoning is even if Nazi Germany had the tech we have today they would not be able to hide Auschwitz from all the forms of modern intelligence, nevermind all the modern social interactions(it only takes one random guy with a smartphone taking the right picture at the right time).
There are more than enough resources available worldwide to prove if China was really committing such a large scale genocide. Yet the media doesn’t want to go that far, remember one of the features of fascism: "The enemy is both strong and weak. By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak”.
it is such a large scale China must be stopped. Yet it is so carefully and masterfully done that obviously it is really difficult to prove and show that it is happening that is why we only have Google Maps, fucking Zens and the token fugitive that certainly didn’t receive a paycheck or compensation for courageously “speaking up”.
So what is the end game, what if we are “wrong”?
I personally don’t see a problem in picking a side and accepting the consequences, if someone wants to be a lib and say we can’t forcibly re-educate or just decide who gets to be taken away or not then that is his moral problem(this person isn’t ever participating in a revolution then in the future let alone any of the past ones).
I would suggest suits him really well for not having to live under the threat that some religious terrorist(again watch the video in the link, this is not an exaggeration) is going to drive over people on the street, at least we can sleep at night knowing we could have done a lot more to stop the fascists but chose not to?
On the other hand what if the fascists and libs are wrong and their actions lead to a World War because they couldn’t accept there was no easy way out of a problem they themselves helped create?
The world sucks and humans are far from perfect, capitalism amplifies all these problems(and creates new problems by itself) and sometimes there aren’t many ways to make it better. I stand by that even if it means admitting to imperfect solutions.
As I said at the beginning this is not ideal, but if the solution is reeducation so that these people can learn the language, learn some new skill for a job and be reintegrated to society then fine by me. I know a lot of people living in third world countries that would kill for the same opportunity for their children.
The right to free speech, cultural heritage, and movement are good things.
CW:
There is always this pattern with concern trolls, they 99% have no clue of what they are talking about, like as if this is a competition for Xi bucks instead of understanding the entire historical and material context at play here.
It’s monetarily beneficial to the capitalist class of China to have Xinjiang as a region which has lots of resources as well as a gateway out of China for the Belt and Road Initiative which is imperialism…
BRI is imperialism because creating a trading network with other third world countries(some of which are under constant military aggression from western imperialist powers) outside of and as an alternative to the main capitalist world economic market is fucking imperialism. The word may as well be removed from the dictionary.
I guess this Thought Amoeba also thinks China is imperialist in Africa and LA, something something predatory loans. What a waste of time I wish I could forget this single cell organism exists after reading this post, but I wont be able now because his name now reminds me he is a main character of a fucking anime.
Marx would be an unlikeable asshole if I brought him into modern times
This is not an argument but a child’s vision of morality. Pretty sure modern humans will be absolutely despised hated for the next few hundreds if not thousands of years given how we are likely going to destroy the planet as we know it today(certainly the planet as it was 100 years ago is long gone now) and yet we fail to create a better world for ourselves despite near omnipotent technological capabilities. All our problems are political and social, technologically we could have (near)post-scarcity probably since the late 80s already, certainly by now.
Whether [insert generic historic figure here] would be up to our moral standards today or not is about as relevant as asking if vanilla ice cream always tasted like vanilla ice cream.
Nah it is better for them to behave like this and say the quiet part out loud, come on admit already it is not about the truth, it was never about the truth and it will never be about the truth.
From a Marxist perspective yes and no. According to Marx there is a law for the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. This tendency has been empirically verified by Marxist economists among them Michael Roberts(post about the world rate of profit).
So will the rate of profit eventually fall to zero and what does that mean? Well, if the current rate of secular fall in the G20 economies continues, it is going to take a very long time to reach zero – well into the next century! Among the G7 economies, however, if the average annual fall in profitability experienced in the last 20 years or so is continued, then the G7 rate will reach zero by 2050. But of course, there could be a new period of revival in the rate of profit, probably driven by the destruction of capital values in a deep slump and by a severe restriction on labour’s share of value by reactionary governments.
This tendency is simply the organic composition which is a fancy term that just means technology and automation rises, the profit margin necessarily must fall. Why is this true is tied to the basic Marxist principle of the labor theory of value which is only human labor generates real value and nothing else, from that surplus value can only be created from real value. An autonomous robot that could manufacture its own repair parts and recharge itself would not create value, and a semi-autonomous robot that requires only minimal human maintenance creates very little value.
In general terms all technology that improves productivity also reduces profit for the capitalist economy. This may be counter intuitive but the classical mainstream economics “common sense” that more productivity = more profit only considers individual capitalists, e.g the first capitalist to replace his workers with machines. In the long term the other capitalists must do the same to compete or they’ll go bankrupt, either way eventually if one capitalist replaces everyone with machines eventually everyone will be replaced by all other capitalists.
To be clear here I’m not talking about “use value” but “exchange value”. An autonomous robot that takes care of the elderly obviously is creating “use value” but not commodities that can be exchanged.
So to get closer to the answer as I said “yes and no” we have to understand that even though Marx was right about the falling rate of profit, he also predicted counter tendencies, measure to restore profitability without necessarily being tied to productivity/technology.
The classical example is how WW2 saved US capitalism. More recently the “neo-liberal period” that starts in the late 80s-early 90s is a clear period of a counter tendency, attempts to increase profitability by basically screwing workers in every way possible.
If we disregard climate change for a moment this means that if nothing happens and we keep going for the next 10-30 years there will be recurring crisis with a collapse at some point. However what is very likely is that before that happens there will be some counter tendency to restore profitability it could be anything like a war or even outright eco-fascism.
Is it just up to the Fed then? No as far as Marxist understand of capitalism is concerned the stock market is irrelevant, only profitability of the productive forces can dictate the frequency and whether or not there are going to be recurring crisis or even collapse.
There is a reason the “line goes up” meme is kind of relevant here, it doesn’t matter how much the line goes up, if you squeeze the population enough the system will crumble.
Not like me and my big brain that thinks Tibet will massively improve materially and socially by being thrown overnight into the hungry mouths of the big wolf called global capitalism.
I mean poverty is decreasing world wide so maybe it would be best for Tibet to go at it alone! I am sure I can find some great white male saviour Bill Gates tweet to support my thesis.
You shouldn’t feel bad, they are 100% a cult that follows a Zens level lunatic. It makes Tom Cruise look like the Pope. The most you could say that real people have suffered by coming into contact with this lunatic and being manipulated for their own exploitation.
The publication had been founded nine years earlier in Georgia by John Tang, a Chinese American practitioner of Falun Gong and current president of New Tang Dynasty. But it was falling short of Li’s ambitions as stated to his followers: to expose the evil of the Chinese government and “save all sentient beings” in a forthcoming divine battle against communism.
Roughly translated by the group as “law wheel exercise,” Falun Gong was started by Li in 1992. The practice, which combines bits of Buddhism and Taoism, involves meditation and gentle exercises and espouses Li’s controversial teachings.
“Li Hongzhi simplified meditation and practices that traditionally have many steps and are very confusing,” said Ming Xia, a professor at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York who has studied Falun Gong. “Basically it’s like fast food, a quickie.”
Li’s teachings quickly built a significant following — and ran into tension with China’s leaders, who viewed his popularity as a threat to the communist government’s hold on power.
In 1999, after thousands of Li’s followers gathered in front of President Jiang Zemin’s compound to quietly protest the arrest of several Falun Gong members, authorities in China banned Falun Gong, closing teaching centers and arresting Falun Gong organizers and practitioners who refused to give up the practice. Human rights groups have reported some adherents being tortured and killed while in custody.
The crackdown elicited condemnation from Western countries, and attracted a new pool of followers in the United States, for whom China and communism were common adversaries.
"The persecution itself elevated Li’s status and brought tremendous media attention,” Ming said. It has also invited scrutiny of the spiritual leader’s more unconventional ideas. Among them, Li has railed against what he called the wickedness of homosexuality, feminism and popular music while holding that he is a god-like figure who can levitate and walk through walls.
Li has also taught that sickness is a symptom of evil that can only be truly cured with meditation and devotion, and that aliens from undiscovered dimensions have invaded the minds and bodies of humans, bringing corruption and inventions such as computers and airplanes. The Chinese government has used these controversial teachings to label Falun Gong a cult. Falun Gong has denied the government’s characterization.
Common lib practice to write what the evil communist party did before mentioning the very clear and obvious reasons why it had to be done.