This would assume the tankie-fascist isn’t also racist
Comment on .ml has got to be the only place on earth where I'd get downvoted for a comment like this
plyth@feddit.org 2 days agoDon’t you think the racism of one of them has a bit more of a consequence than of the other?
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
“Let us assume that my political opponent is a racist because it makes my job easier” lol fuck off clown
plyth@feddit.org 2 days ago
Why? The way I phrased it, racism was included for both sides.
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I guess I missed that. My mistake.
Lehmuusa@nord.pub 2 days ago
I completely agree.
And now, when writing this… Argh. Uyghurs. You absolutely cannot compare it to what Nazis did, but if you compare it to what other fascist countries died then yes, that’s quite some consequence.
I still would not write an equal sign between fascists and tankies, though.
In the end, tankie is a type of a socialist, and one becomes socialist through a will to do good. Being a tankie is some EXTREMELY fucking ill-advised way to do good, because the result is indeed very very bad. But you don’t really become a fascist in order to do good. You become a fascist because you think you are worth more than others.
I think being a tankie is about the goal being more important than the means – all the way to an extent where the means completely obliterate the goal. And being a fascist is about deciding that being limitlessly selfish is okay. One is at least trying to have a good goal. The other one is just… “Everything for ME and MY TRIBE, all others should DIE!” But in the end, what’s being done to Uyghurs is just horror. Being thrown into a concentration camp and being subjected to various inhumane experiments is already on a very high level of evil to have to experience.
TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 2 days ago
You could also compare it to things “democratic” countries have done. America for one has had decades of segregation based on ethnicity and has had concentration camps for ethnic minorities, not to mention a genocide against indigenous peoples.
If we are using that to tell how much like Nazis a nation is plenty of democratic countries are a lot closer to Nazi Germany than China.
I’m not claiming that China has never done anything that I don’t agree with, however if we are measuring their results, it’s hard to conclude that it’s ill advised. In the last 40 years China has lifted nearly a billion people out of extreme poverty and has done so with out endless cycles of wars.
Meanwhile democratic nations in the West have seen more of their citizens slide into to poverty while killing millions of people in forever wars.
Again, I don’t agree with a lot of the CCP policies. That being said, I do think there are some exaggerations when it comes to the Uyghur people, though based on their own information I would say there is a pattern of ethnic prejudice
That being said, even if we use the most inflammatory information from western media and utilize the high estimate of 1.8 million ethnic minorities being put into reeducation camps. That’s less than 1/6th of the Uyghur population in China. Less than the 2 million people currently incarcerated in the US, of those whom nearly 40% are from an ethnic minority who only make up around 10% of the total population.
This is not my attempt of a whataboutism, just trying to illiustrate that unjustifiable national policy is not unique to socialist or democratic capitalist governments.
Lehmuusa@nord.pub 2 days ago
Yes, you can. Generally, any country where an ideology goes over individuals’ well-being tends to do this shit. China does, USA does as well. Not terribly surprising.
1/6 on camps is a LOT. It does fulfill the definition of genocide.
What makes you think that USA is relevant here? I am not from USA. USA is not a part of China, nor the other way around.
Show me a democratic country where this happens. You’re giving me China and USA. And there’s also the Russia. But is there actually a democratic country where people are handled they way countries such as USA and China do?
TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 2 days ago
My point was that any specific economic policy or government style does not necessarily dictate the outcomes of the people it is in charge of. If this is similar to your belief, then I would question why you elected to make a statement that seemed to limit itself to a binary of fascist/“tankies”.
Again, that is using the most hyperbolic estimate. Also, I do not think temporarily holding a percent of an ethnicity in an internment camp is enough to call something a genocide. It’s definitely not great, and is systemic ethnic prejudice, but I don’t know if that would qualify as a genocide.
The US put 80% of Japanese Americans in interment camps during ww2 and I’ve never heard that referenced as a genocide.
I think I explained in the last paragraph of my original argument that it was to provide relevant comparison of similar examples that were not fascist nor “tankies”.
In your claim you said that you shouldn’t be a tankie because it led to bad/evil results. Would you also claim you shouldn’t be a liberal democracy because it leads to bad/evil results?
First of all…how is the US not a democratic country? It may not be a great one, but it still has free and fair elections. If the US is not a liberal democracy… What is it?
Secondly, there have been plenty examples of democratic countries having unjustifiable foreign and domestic policies.
Just off the top of my head Canada has a brutal history of suppressing their native inhabitants that endures to the modern age. Both france and the UK also had interment camps during ww2. The UK committed a genocidal famine against ireland and Bengal as a democratic nation. Most of the worst aspects of colonialism were conducted after European powers transitioned out of absolute monarchies into democracies. South Africa and Israel both conducted an apartheid state in modern times, one going further into a genocide of Palestinians.
And more than likely the nation you currently live in has materially or militarily aided the US in one of their unjustifiable wars in the middle East.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
The vast majority of muslim nations on earth got together to send delegates to investigate in person and they declared the accusations to be baseless.
Image
Lehmuusa@nord.pub 2 days ago
My experiences with Uyghurs differ from yours. I was backpacking in Kazakstan and China and the repression was easy to notice with bare eyes. The Uyghurs wouldn’t be that scared of a 7-year-old Han-girl if there was no repression.
How was your visit to East Türkestan?
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Your experiences are worthless, try shutting the fuck up and listening Image
davel@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Cool story bro.
Oh, and not all Muslims are Arabs, BTW!
AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Listen, FUCK the IAEA you could see those Iraqi chemical weapons factories with your bare eyes
Where did I get this red fish from?? Got an answer for that??
Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 1 day ago
Did you try talking to anyone? Its difficult because google translate doesn’t do Uhygur speech-to-text, but does translate Uhygur as Kazakh kind of.
That’s not to say there’s not serious issues, but it seemed plainly obvious to my bare eyes that the bulk of the claims of genocide are outright fabrications.
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
i recommend this video by Eric Hovagim to learn more about the Uyghur topic (but i guess you’ll probably skip it based on its title?)
Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I skip all youtube referrals, who has time for that? Reading is much faster, more data, more better.
Videos are how you teach children
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Here and here are two texts on the subject which cover some of the same things as that video (albeit not from a first-hand person-from-the-US-traveling-in-Xinjiang perspective like the video does).
Lehmuusa@nord.pub 2 days ago
I did watch the first three minutes. Everything he shows is true, everything he explains as interpretation is just full of shit.
“Why?"
Well, for the same reason Soviet Union was doing the same to its colonies. Or why France was doing the same to its.
Blargh, the guy’s eaten the hook with bait and floater.
calmblue75@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Ok, can you tell why?
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
The Soviet Union had no colonies. This was always projection on the part of colonial and neocolonial countries for the USSR’s unwavering support for national liberation struggles, which earned them incredible amounts of sanctions.
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
If you think China colonized Xinjiang, well… yeah, they did. But that was 22 centuries ago, a millennium before the [people now known as] Uyghurs had even arrived there. The demographics and ruling empires unsurprisingly changed a few times in the ensuing millennia, but since the Qing dynasty committed the Dzungar genocide there (from 1755–1758, with help of several peoples including Han and Uyghur) it has mostly remained a part of China.
The ancient history is interesting, but more recent events (eg Al-Qaeda-affiliated groups the US was funding there) are more relevant to the present situation.
What specifically is he full of shit about? I recommend watching more than three minutes of it.
calmblue75@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
That was quite informative, thanks for sharing!
hakase@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
I skipped it based on your instance.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 48 minutes ago
Seems like a stupid thing to do and an even stupider thing to voluntarily admit
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
Anti-intellectualism truly is on the rise.
RiverRock@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
Man it’s so cool that red scare propaganda in the current age has a kind of SCP collaborative fiction vibe to it, where you can just Say Shit and riff on it to adjust reality to your bizzare specifications
greenbit@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
It’s hard to see tankies ever have that good goal. They really really defend the oppression they achieve
Lehmuusa@nord.pub 1 day ago
I believe at the point they have already become tankies, no good goal exists anymore. They only seem to work to defend what they have already achieved. And that is oppression.
I’m not sure socialism or communism can ever be made to work, but at least Marx and Lenin made it much more difficult to ever get there by demandinfmg we do the opposite of the goals of communism in order to get communism. People who are okay with cleansings and repression will cleanse and repress.
You don’t really go through the chore of reading Capital without really wanting to change the society for better. And because Marx, the death of communism, preferred violence and is convincing with his way of argumentation (at least if you’re a bit stupid), those who read the book until the end, end up forfeiting all good goals and will go for repression.
Tankies are people who used to want good things and fairness. And then they converted from that into tankies.
A strong leader will always lead you into a Russia. Into a quagmire.
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 1 hour ago
Image
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
This is nonsense, the only part you got correct is that those who read through Capital generally have an interest in a better world. Neither Marx nor Lenin advocated “doing the opposite” to get to communism, both argued for the establishment of a worker state to gradually collectivize all of the means of production and distribution. Historically, this method has been enormously beneficial for the working classes, while breing quite scary for landlords, capitalists, slavers, and fascists.
I’m also not at all understanding what you mean by Marx being “convincing with his way of argumentation (at least if you’re a bit stupid).” What would an intelligent person, by your estimation, take fault with in Marx?
Objection@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
I’m sorry, what? Have you ever actually tried to read Capital? Most of Marx’s works are dense and academic, drawing intellectual traditions that are often unfamiliar to modern readers (classical economics, Hegel, etc). Marx’s way of argumentation isn’t really geared toward the lowest common denominator.
It’s kinda funny how you can’t even keep your criticism straight through a single comment. In one sentence, reading Marx is a “chore” that nobody would want to slog through, in the very next one, Marx is so persuasive, his honeyed words easily swaying the minds of any who stumble across them, like the Sirens calling ships to their rocks.
As for “no good goal exists anymore” or “it’s hard to see what good goal tankies ever had” maybe we just like it when this sort of thing happens:
lemmy.ml/…/86eca1ab-0d3d-4d7e-99fa-a7a3ddb4c3dd.j…
The revolution that feeds the children gets my support.
When you figure out a better way to do that, get back to me.