Asklemmy

50811 readers

813 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

What have you heard people say that screams "I have lived my life in a Westernised bubble and have no idea how the world is" ? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 3 weeks ago by frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

153 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

My point still is that if the working class fighting for better conditions for themselves is illegal the state is not on their side. Which by the numbers it is.

This is just an example of it but is part of larger trend of extreme (worse than the US on rights is extreme) worker explotation and supression.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Strikes are not the main way workers fight for better conditions for themselves in socialism, the society as a whole is oriented in a fashion where this is achievable by reform and referendum, democratic institutions. Strikes can and have been used by western, anti-communist groups against socialist systems, and this is what's illegal. You're again falsely pretending the PRC and US Empire have the same economic system, and thus mechanisms like strikes have the same utility in each, but that's not the case. Strikes are more useful in capitalist economies where the state is on the side of the capitalists.

During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.

Dr. Michael Parenti

[+] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's exactly what you're saying. Workers wield collective power through the state in the PRC, that is their primary means. Tracking strike numbers isn't an accurate assessment of the health of the economic system or the support workers have for socialism. Instead, looking at metrics I've shared like worker confidence in the system and support for it directly state that people broadly support the system overall.

Your comments about Xinjiang were removed because they were Fox News-style conspiracy theory, not actual grounded analysis. I already linked what I recommend you check out.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Then why would there still be so many examples of workers effectivally saying otherwise despite the legal risk?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

There aren't. The system isn't perfect, of course, but overall the working class supports their socialist system, and believe it represents their interests. Strikes are largely against capitalists when they do happen, not socialism. You've been shown several times that the system is consistently and overwhelmingly supported by over 90% of people, far higher than western countries, yet you continue to hem and haw around that while vaguely gesturing towards the fact that strikes exist in China, as though that alone is a point.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The fact that strikes are illegal and against capitalists implies the state is protecting capitalist intetests and not worker interests.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Strikes are not illegal in China. Strikes are regulated. Again, the people support their system broadly, the large firms and key industries are publicly owned, capitalists are regularly executed by the state. You keep affirming a view of China that does not exist, ie one where capitalists are empowered at the expense of workers, when the opposite is true, and is why the studies you've been shown reflect extremely positive views of society and the direction China is going in among the working class.

[+] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

No, this is wrong on all accounts. The fact that over 90% of people support the system and believe it to be headed in the right direction, the fact that the large firms and key industries are publicly owned, and the fact that year over year conditions are rapidly improving for the working class do not support your claims.

There are not "concentration camps." The existence of strikes that additionally break the law do not mean strikes are illegal. Western, state-funded propaganda outlets like the Victims of Communism Foundation, BBC, and Radio Free Asia do not honestly depict the PRC. Wealth disparity is falling in China, and more importantly working class conditions are dramatically improving and have been for almost a century.

You have a very confused and distorted view caused by looking at relatively minor problems as though they are widespread and massive. You also have no evidence backing your claims, other than the idea that strikes exist in China. The working class became the ruling class at the founding of the PRC, and has been since. There has never been a time where capitalists have become the ruling class. There hasn't been a successful counter-revolution.

I think if you want to understand China more, you should at least familiarize yourself with the basics of Marxism-Leninism. You can use my intro ML reading list, or Qiao Collective's SWCC intro reading guide.