robinn2 [he/him]

They’re the type of socialism (social democracy) that I approve of.

Social democracy is not socialism, it is social-fascism, class collaboration leeching off the wealth of the global south like a settler vampire from the hill of the imperialism. Look at how social democratic settlers treat immigrants, or minorities/natives. You fundamentally do not understand what socialism is.

And no offense, but you have no fucking idea what the the PRC is doing. You know nothing about their government structure, how policy is carried out, or the way the system functions at all. I guarantee you could not name the tiers of government, or even three government officials without looking it up. Your ignorance is shown right away by the fact that you say “CCP” (Chinese Communist Party) when the correct acronym is “CPC” (Communist Party of China). This is such a simple mistake that proves you have not read any media outside of the west regarding China.

Ugh horrible argument. No, you have to contend with the source I provided, not skip it and provide a different source, especially when the prolewiki page is a challenge to the Wikipedia page, and so citing the latter is like citing a work against which a polemic is directed at the polemic as an “alternative.”

Apparently Wikipedia is “not biased”, they just forbid certain sources, include U.S. government aligned sources by and large (this article you’ve cited sources Radio Free Europe, a CIA propaganda outlet; the New York Times summaries of situations in countries the U.S. is opposed to (this is done 10x), despite the source being a rubber stamp for the U.S. government; a Washington Post opinion article which completely obfuscates the nature of the press as a tool of class rule), and so on. Sorry, Wikipedia is biased.

It is their fault. They lost an argument only to whine about me and others in another thread (after willfully ignoring my response to their points) and now they say they “don’t have a lot of time” (they had time to write 400 responses and link multiple resources they didn’t verify) when asked to read, that’s textbook bad faith cowardice. This person you’re responding to, JohnDclay, is the asshole lib from the 500 response thread.

I’m trying to talk in good faith, but I don’t have 10 hours to read about it. I’ve only researched about 1 or 2 hours. But I’m definitely not just taking your website at face value.

Right, so you didn’t read my carrd and then linked a different source instead (super good faith) that I completely refuted (apparently you felt no need to respond to my complete rebuttal]. So you didn’t read the comment or the response to your rebuttal, and yet you’re saying you’re acting in good faith because you don’t have a lot of time/haven’t done a lot of research? Whatever, then don’t act like you’re qualified to have an opinion.

But I’m definitely not just taking your website at face value.

What does this even mean? “Face value”? It’s a collection of sources. Seriously, if you don’t have the knowledge to even respond to my points, much less my complete refutation of your own points, don’t ghost respond to me acting like I’ve said something crazy to get support in another thread. It’s cowardly and pathetic.

I’m just so fed up with folks online regarding, what i would call state capitalist countries as genuine socialism,

Read up on your Trotsky fool

https://en.prolewiki.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

I will have you shot

“Once”

I geuss I should have said shove a catus up your ass. [sic lmao] Because it might dislodge that fucking stick thats up there.

You’re the one that started the insults, I was merely replying to your point (something you still haven’t been able to grapple with).

The US isn’t a place that I would hold up as an example, for pretty much anything.

And yet the narrative you were repeating was derived from the U.S., which you would know if you engaged with my sources. Naturally you were incapable, and still are. And you will lash out again when I prove you wrong on these new points, unable to conjure a refutation, with your “points” being barely developed anyways. “What if I despise the U.S. and yet uncritically believe everything they say about AES” is not the “reasonable” position.

Like how long has Winnie the pooh been the chairman is so sensitive that he jails people for saying that? [this sentence is barely legible]

Another commenter said that Winnie the Pooh was banned in China, which I proved completely wrong (naturally I was blocked). Your claim is a little more unique. Should I explain how this “meme” is racist? Naturally this is not required, as it has become explicit to the point of Xi Jinping’s skin being covered with a yellow filter on the profile image of a comm on an instance you are federated with (sh.itjust.works/c/meanwhileongrad). Hilarious (oh and consult this for “the meme originated in China” argument). Whatever, Luo Daiqing is the only example I could find online, of which he assumed the identity of someone else to post these comparisons, and thus was liable to slander (we don’t even get the specifics of his “criticism”, but this is the implication based on sensationalist stories).

Let’s talk about how Beijing has lied to Hong-Kong…

This is the most specific criticism you can muster? With regards to what? Do you mean one country, two systems? Hong Kong remains capitalist, but the mainland was forced to crack down on protests that included burning an unarmed civilian alive and killing an elderly street cleaner with a brick, all for the noble cause of letting a man murder his pregant wife in Taiwan and flee to Hong Kong without facing charges; and the U.S. government (4th PSYOP group) already admitted to “pulling the strings” behind the protests in a propaganda video. I dare you to address this.

Or about how they don’t own Taiwan…

[response to this] (you will be incapable of replying as per, because you don’t actually know anything about this subject)

Get it through your skull that just because they wave the red flag, doesn’t mean they are good.

Great strawman, but you know I never made this point, so I don’t know who you think will fall for this.

Under the guise of “neither Washington nor Beijing”, you repeat the propaganda of the former, and although confident, have no ability to actually prove your points. You are the donkey, led by a carrot just out of view, letting your nose guide you and while walking in the direction it is pointed confidently asserting that you have no need for carrots; you forge your “own path”, which coincidentally has already been trotted out for you, but by touching the blades and tossed dirt to each side assure yourself that you have found “the truth.”

You’re a dumbass western chauvinist who calls anything propaganda, regardless of claims being proven, because anything outside of your ideology regarding “regimes” cannot be accepted. Rather than proving anything I said wrong, you resorted to childish and bigoted insults, as encompassed in the term “tankie”, and in your homophobia, which you justified as being a different variety of queer yourself, and admitting to merely holding water for bigotry under the notion that “this insults people, and so must be used”, showing your ignorance not only in Chinese matters but also in your own arguments. You are the one carrying water for the U.S. (a murderous regime far surpassing China) through these narratives that are mainly propagated by them (as shown in the multitude of sources I linked) but under the guise of objectivity and opposition to extremes. You have one line which you can repeat as if it has some rhetorical power, when really it makes you seem pathetic.

Thought-terminating nonsense. It’s a homophobic insult regardless of your sexual orientation. Either way, you couldn’t refute my sources so it doesn’t really matter that you’re resorting to insults. Very clear coping mechanism.

“Although state censorship and propaganda are widespread, our survey reveals that citizen perceptions of governmental performance respond most to real, measurable changes in individuals’ material well-being” – Harvard study; this also shows people complaining about shit, admitting to lodging complaints/being willing to protest surrounding main issues. You had this cited to you back in another thread (where I refuted your claims on another topic, as did others), and yet you couldn’t come up with a single intelligent response. Now you’re saying the same bs with the same ignorant confidence, as if you have any evidence that simply disapproving of the government lands you in prison, despite the claim being disproven empirically (see above) and logically (“Idk why this is” and then “you can figure it out yourself” being your only responses; I don’t believe you have an actual answer to this refutation). The only reason I recognized you is because this is almost verbatim the exact comment you made in the other thread. You have brain worms.

https://robinntime.substack.com/p/free-press-and-speech

“Tiananmen Square 1989”

read up

“why did the Dalai Lama leave Taiwan”

That’s easy, the CPC and Tibetan masses didn’t let him keep the theocracy that allowed slaves/serfs to be tortured by the feudal lordship and women to be barred from education.

You know, when over 1 million people took to the streets, protested and set the city on fire?

They also set people on fire. The protests were started because they opposed an extradition bill designed to address a loophole that just allowed a man in HK to murder his pregnant wife and flee to Taiwan and avoid criminal prosecution; you shouldn’t support the HK protests.

Is your government still using “prisoner’s of conscience” as an organ donor pool

Glad we’re taking the claims of religious zealots as established fact

There’s the thought-terminating epithet. The site doesn’t just link “propaganda”, it directly refutes what you have to say through hundreds of sources and direct rebuttals, but naturally that is impossible for you to admit or engage with.

Great to see some more scratched liberal homophobia as well.

Ugh such tired, ignorant arguments. Disappointing, especially for someone so sure of themselves.

Dude they’re fucking state capitalists, not socialists.

1. Read this on why China is not capitalist and the justification for reform
2. Also read this on “capitalism” in China
3. Read this on monopoly state capitalism (specifically applies to underdeveloped countries under the DOTP)

Hell, if you support China you already support anti-lgbt legislation

Social development is a matter of and emerges from material development, and so it is absurd to expect equal social development between countries of varying material development (of which China’s underdevelopment was a matter of Western colonialism/imperialism). It is inaccurate to say “anti-lgbt legislation”, and more accurate to say “lack of desirable pro-LGBT+ legislation” (same-sex relationships are legal in China, although same-sex marriage is not legally recognized for instance, with some concessions in this field, of which improvement has been occuring.

2020 report published in BMC Public Health: “For member of the Chinese LGBT community, the greatest source of pressure to conform to societal norms of sexuality and identity comes from family members—particularly parents […] a higher level of economic development in provinces was associated with a decrease in discrimination, and we identified that every 100 thousand RMB increase in per capita GDP lead to a 6.4% decrease in discriminatory events perpetrated by heterosexuals […] he prevalence of this discrimination is associated with the economic development of the province in which it occurs.”

As such, development is conducive to progressive change, and development is prioritized in China, especially poverty alleviation, which more rapidly builds the base for improving LGBT+ acceptance/equality. Please read and don’t misrepresent things in the future.

https://xinjiangahr.carrd.co/

tbf Capital in the 21st Century sucked