What’s up with this straight up pro-china and pro-russia stuff on Lemmy lately?
It’s not even praising the people of China and Russia, but rather their gov directly.
Obviously the states have problems, and the EU to a lesser degree, but they at least have some human rights.
Is this some kind of organized disinformation campaign?
~I’m not who you were replying to before.~
I agree that the chinese mixed market model is better, and that the US sucks ass, but I have one question about your claims.
can you explain to me how that can be true while the government is unelected and visibly does authoritarian stuff such as censorship, violent repression of various undesireables and supression of independent worker’s unions?
all of these claims are provably false.
The source for those is either you, quora, or the ccp.
Not very reliable sources, and the results of the polls which I do know are legitimate may be explained by the lack of free press.
Some of the stuff is true, like the better healthcare system, or high speed rail, but that’s more the US being absymally bad than china being great
First of all, the state is an extension of the class in power, it isn’t a class in and of itself. The class in power is the one in control of the large firms and key industries, in the PRC these are publicly owned. This can help make sense of the Chinese model of socialism.
With that in mind, the government is elected. It doesn’t have the same kind of competing party model of liberal democracy, but socialist democracy is focused on cohesion and cooperation. The government does censor speech, but that isn’t incompatible with working class power, the speech that is censored is largely capitalists trying to undermine the system (like Jack Ma). Further, independent worker unions in the context of socialism is dangerous, the government is already one run by the working class, so having a divided working class is more of a way for capitalists to drive a wedge between them and undermine the system.
I think if you read up more on SWCC things will make more sense.
Well, if the class in power is the one who controls the large firms, key industries and media, then the class in power are the high-ranking CCP officials, no? And ccp officials choose who the new ccp officials will be. I don’t see how the working class is involved here. I don’t really understand how the government is elected.
I don’t really want to go read a bunch of theory, because I think you should be able to leverage your clearly extensive knowledge of the subject to convince me.
The CPC is not a class, it’s the most politically advanced of the proletariat, largely. CPC officials are elected as well. It isn’t fashioned like a liberal democracy, but a socialist one.
I get not wanting to read theory, and I understand needing to meet people where they are at. What’s your understanding of the Chinese system of democracy? What distinguishes socialist democracy from liberal democracy? What is a class, in your eyes? If I don’t know where you personally stand in your understanding, then I don’t really know where to start beyond what I’ve already shared.
Okay, my understanding is that there are classically two classes: the working class, and the bourgeoisie. Only thing I’d add is that there’s the “I own means” bourgeoisie and the “I am powerful politically” bourgeoisie. Pretty much always the same, but not necessarily.
“western” democracy improves upon this by making every person have at least some power politically, thanks to everyone being able to promote and run on ideas, this also allows local and foreign powers to amplify certain ideas, which isn’t great. Various factors make this system more or less effective at representing the people’s will.
As I understand it, the Chinese system of democracy is basically a mirage, because while you can argue it does a better job than any other dictatorship, it still is one, since the people have virtually no say on who the leaders are. I see it as something akin to a meritocracy, where an elite choose other people they deem fit to lead. In this context the CPC are no functionally no different to the bourgeoisie, they just replaced them.
The top-down governance can be good, but it also causes a lot of problems, such as the one child policy that created and still creates tons of problems and suffering.
As for Imperialism, which was mentioned earler in the thread, while the US and europe are undisputed world champions of imperialism, china also does imperialism in it’s own borders, with the western provinces.
I am certainly open to being wrong, this is just how I currently see the subject.
edit: clarification
You’re pretty off on classes. Classes are relations to the means of production. The bourgeoisie are the capitalists, owners of capital. Politically powerful people are not “bourgeoisie.” In capitalism, the state is under the control of the bourgeoise, in socialism the state is under the control of the proletariat.
Western “democracy” is the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Since capitalists own the media, large firms, and key industries, they own the state and control the flow of information. The proletariat is only allowed a say as far as the bourgeoisie allows them.
In China, the proletariat is in control of the state. The people elect representatives, and often these representatives elect further representatives. The people have the ultimate say, and as I showed, their will is expressed at higher rates than bourgeois democracy.
The CPC is not “basically the bourgeoisie.” The CPC is not made up of capital owners, nor is the CPC a business, it’s the ruling party as an extension of the proletariat.
China is not imperialist. You cannot be imperialist within your own borders, nor does the central government mistreat local or regional governments.
Basically, I think there’s a lot you would gain from reading a bit more about this. I know you said you wanted to avoid reading theory, but there’s far too much to adequately cover in lemmy comments here.