Nice strawman have you ever talked to one of us

sick af. I don’t write as much these days (read none at all) because I’m busy with lots of stuff but I’m glad someone was impacted by my writing.

Yooo 22 days later but thank you for quoting from my essay!!

I’m not asking to see the comments for myself, I’m asking if you can point to evidence of this happening; it’s not the same question.

Marx was the third ever sociologist, the first being Weber and the second I always forget his name. But this is historically attested to, it’s not something I just pulled out of my ass lol

European Jews were not considered white before and during WW2. Whiteness has always changed with whatever we needed it to be for political reasons. The Irish were not considered white. In South Africa during Apartheid, a Japanese national was forbidden by a bus driver from entering a whites-only bus because the driver thought he was Chinese. The man sued and won against the driver as the Japanese were considered white and allowed to board segregated buses.

Fun fact: did you know the ICC has only ever prosecuted African nationals since its inception in 2002?

The point is that you are unwilling to even engage with the idea that Russia seeks to eliminate Ukrainian identity

Is that like a litmus test? Next time I’m ordering pizza I’ll ask the restaurant if they are willing to engage with the idea that Russia seeks to eliminate Ukrainian identity.

Literally no idea why you brought that up again lol

Okay so no evidence Hexbear or Lemmygrad have denied genocides?

A correction: Lemmygrad and Hexbear are two different instances, and it’s an oversimplification to lump them in together. Lemmygrad does not defederate from any real instance, we have possibly one of the smallest block lists of any bigger instances.

Capital is a thesis on economy, why would it help you on politics?

Surely you’d know what it’s about if you’ve read it.

It’s funny how fascists always leave out the part that actually gets them called a fascist, isn’t it?

Marxism is relevant to everything through dialectics, which was synthesized by Hegel first. Also the emoji size is a quirk of Lemmy, all custom emojis take up their original size on other instances regardless of which instance it comes from.

Written by Timofei Sergeitsev in RIA Novosti, the rhetoric in the editorial…

Oh so it’s not a “Kremlin paper”, it’s just what some guy thinks. If there are “no more Nazis in Ukraine than anywhere else” then there are no more nazis in Russia than anywhere else 🙃

X

Can you point to genocide denial before you make sweeping accusations?

Literally none of what you claimed in the opening paragraph happened but go off. Palestine will carry on with the operation whether you agree with it or not, all you have is impotent rage.

But as I’ve argued, having elements of capitalism like commodity production (and the subsequent export of these commodities) does not make China capitalist by themselves, which is also the original point I was making, that China has not “turned” to capitalism* like OP might have implied.

Markets are not inherently capitalist, and these capitalist elements in China allow them to build their productive forces which are required to achieve socialism, they’re also the same commodities they build for the Belt and Road initiative, for example 😁

Capitalism can be summed up in many ways, and one of them is production for the sake of finding a market and making money. There is capital in China (in the marxist definition) and people can make money, but while these capitalist want to simply make more money, for the Chinese government the goal is to build up production and achieve socialism, hence why the superstructure of China vs. any country in the imperial core is different. In the first case (capitalism) we’ll just keep producing and creating markets infinitely, the “anarchy of production and socialisation of labour”, and in the second case they’re using some methods (with the consequences that come with it -> if you make a factory to produce stuff, you will have to find a market to buy that stuff so you can produce more stuff) as a stepping stone until they don’t need to any more.

Of course the superstructure is predicated on the base, and in China for example land is leased to businesses, but never sold, and the government can take back their property at any time, including whatever is on it. It’s fundamentally different to capitalism in the west.

capitalism is not bits and pieces here and there, it’s an entire mode of production with its own base and superstructure. In that sense China can’t be called capitalist. At best we could say it has “capitalist elements” but even then that’s a stretch when getting down into the details of what these elements actually are.

Which communists? The USSR was infiltrated and the US then spent millions getting the bumbling mass of ethanol known as Yeltsin to win an election. They (the new capitalist government) even sieged the parliament building and sent tanks in Moscow to disperse the huge waves of protestors. It then lead to one of the worst humanitarian crisis in the modern age almost overnight.

And in China they are assuredly not capitalist, this becomes very clear once you read Deng Xiaoping. It’s Schroedinger’s China: when they do something bad they’re communists, and when they do something good (like lifting people out of poverty) they’re capitalists.

Cuba is still socialist, DPRK is still socialist, Vietnam is also reforming and opening up kinda like China did but a bit differently so still socialist