588
US Fatally Bombs Wedding in Iran, Killing 4, Including Children (truthout.org)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/world@lemmy.world
175 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 40 points 2 months ago (54 children)

To be fair, the US became the world's imperial hegemon after World War II. What changed is the advancement of social media, making it far harder to hide the crimes of empire. Vietnam was the first real exposure to televised war in the west, and the media was key to the anti-war movement. The US then exerted tighter control on the media apparatus, but this is much harder to do with social media.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 54 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (34 children)

    Iran shutting off the internet ultimately helped prevent Israeli penetration. Mossad had active elements stirring up unrest and terrorism in Iran.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 34 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (25 children)

    Cowbee, Iran shut off the internet because people were protesting for women's rights. This was years before the Israeli/American bombing campaign. Stop simping for authoritarian regimes. You sound like an American liberal the way you apologize for their actions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Mossad openly admitted to being active in Iran:

    Go out into the streets together. The time has come. We are with you. Not only from a distance and verbally. We are with you in the field.

    If Mossad's official Twitter account admitted this, how can you say that this wasn't a critical factor?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    You're dodging the subject. Israel has been fucking with Iran for decades, that's not the question. The question is why are you okay with Iran shutting down the internet to stop a women's rights movement?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    I'm okay with Iran shutting down the internet to stop a Mossad-backed color revolution intended to pave the way for the modern war against it. Do you think between the protests and the bombing of Minab elementary school that Israel and the US suddenly decided to get involved, or do you realize that this was a part of the actual plan the entire time?

    The people of Iran should be able to chart their own course, free from the interference of the genocidal US and Israeli attacks.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    ran shut off the internet because people were protesting for women’s rights

    Iran shut of internet because of organized attempts at insurrection using women's rights as an excuse. UK/US want another puppet in place shitting on gold toilets selling out the country cheap.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    Two things can be true. Personally I think women's rights are a great reason for insurrection.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    They weren't a reason. They were an excuse.

    What you are actually supporting is invading and subjugating Iran.

    Also, it is amusing how you (plural) keep speaking about women's rights when as supposedly a valid reason to invade other countries (a la the white supremacist fairy tale of "civilising savages") while your empire actually died stuff like the overthrow of the socialist government of Afghanistan that did improve women's rights.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    I never said I supported the invasion, you're putting words in my mouth. I said women's liberation is a good reason for people to rise up against their government, which is what an insurrection is. The US invasion of Iran is an act of imperialism intended to subjugate and exploit it, not an insurrection.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    I never said I supported the invasion

    You do support pro-NATO forces subjugating Iran for the benefit of invaders of Iraq and Afghanistan simply because of the pretense of "women's rights". The people that you support in this case do not care about women's rights.

    I said women’s liberation is a good reason for people to rise up against their government, which is what an insurrection is.

    These people claiming that they just want women's rights doesn't mean that that is what they actually struggle for.

    You are buying another round of Nayirah testimony/Iraq WMD and other such cases of propaganda.

    What is needed first and foremost right now is liberation from NATO, as it is the most major barrier for improving, as whichever group will try to sabotage the Iranian government - even if it will genuinely want things like women's rights - they will be used by NATO to just further (re-)subjugate Iran and wooden their living conditions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    The people I support are the Iranian people themselves

    You (plural) say this, but every time it is some CIA/NED-backed group. And inevitably it turns out that the only reasons you (plural) do so, is because your empire told you that those are the "good ones".

    Even if the goal of Mossad’s support for the protests was to destabilize Iran in preparation for the US invasion, that does not make the protesters “pro-NATO forces,”

    Yes, it does. They are literally used by NATO to maintain or strengthen colonial subjugation of the Global South.

    nor does it mean women’s rights are nothing but a pretense.

    For these groups, it is. Their actual goals are not to improve living conditions, but bring their countries under the heel of Washington.

    While that’s certainly the case for Mossad, the protests were undeniably carried out by the Iranian people themselves to advance the cause of women’s liberation.

    As in, the low-level members of the group thought that those were the group's goals?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    You’re lumping me in with a group I don’t identity with

    You might not voluntarily identify with the other people who are just supporting yet another group that conveniently serves NATO's interests, but so far there isn't a good case for your favourite groups attempting to improve the living conditions in the Global South.

    Hell, you actually admit that Mossad using such groups to (re-)subjugate countries in the Global South (and, thus, worsen the living conditions there) isn't enough for you to drop support for them.

    I’ve said repeatedly that I don’t support the war and that I oppose imperialism and yet you keep arguing as if I am in support of it.

    You can't claim that you do not support the war, and that you oppose imperialism (and, I assume, you also want to claim to oppose colonialism) while also supporting pro-colonial efforts that would only advance the imperialist and colonialist goals of NATO and opposing Global South states defending themselves against your empire.

    You speak about Iranians as if they are hapless pawns unable to think for themselves

    Where did I say that?
    In fact, the people of Iran have been struggling against you with a significant degree of success.
    If you meant that I do not support wannabe-compradors, then that's not an issue of thinking that people can't "think for themselves". The issue is that I do not support those wannabe-compradors.

    insisting that the only reason they would protest against their government is if foreign intelligence agencies directed them to

    Nowhere did I say that. I even pointed out that even in the cases where such groups do genuinely want to achieve better living conditions for the Global South, their efforts will be utilised by NATO to actually worsen those living conditions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago (12 children)

    He is literally a propagandist that never engages in good faith. I'm not sure if he works for republicans or actually believes his bullshit but he's definitely doing work for Putin.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (11 children)

    I have always engaged in good faith. I don't work for republicans or Putin, I spend time and money organizing as a communist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (10 children)

    🙄

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (9 children)

    Is there a reason you spread disinformation about me?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (8 children)

    The majority of the fediverse knows exactly what you are cow.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (7 children)

    I doubt I'm that famous, but even if you're correct about that, that still doesn't explain the disinformation, ie allegations of LLM use, etc.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [+] 0 points 2 months ago* (7 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

    Might be anecdotal, but many more people tend to like me than hate me, especially to the degree you do. Especially considering the baseless accusations of LLM use, the subsequent dehumanization of me (ie, calling me an "engagement bot"), all of this is far more unserious than taking a consistent, principled line on the DPRK, a line shared by the Black Panther Party, Party for Socialism and Liberation, and the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC). The fact is, Marxist-Leninists have been sympathetic to the Korean socialist project since its inception, and its resistance to Japanese and later US colonialism.

    As for the idea that I am "trying to get the republicans elected," or that I have changed how active I am because of primary season, neither of these have any evidence. I do actual organization work, which means organizing against Trump and the capitalist state. I have agitated against both the democrats and republicans consistently, because I am a socialist, a Marxist-Leninist specifically. This consistent, principled stance does not make me "bad-faith," even if you yourself disagree with Marxism and Marxism-Leninism. I put my skin on the line and roll my sleeves up because I truly believe a better world is possible, if that's "bad-faith" then what would you consider to be "good-faith?" Anything you personally agree with? Would also like an example of how my understanding of theory is shallow, I love to know how to improve.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    I encourage people to not treat voting as the primary source of political engagement anyone has. For me, it does not matter who people vote for, as revolution remains necessary. That isn't to say Republicans and Democrats are the same, they do have some differences, but their overall function as maintainers of imperialism leads to critical conclusions: trying to "push the democrats left" is a failed endeavor and cannot work.

    I don't believe third party voting is a meaningful way of gaining political change, because I don't believe reformism works. The purpose of third party political participation in elections is to prove the ineffectiveness of reformism, to advertise the party platform, and to gain new members. This is the extent that socialists understand elections to be genuinely effective.

    The current wave of the DSA successfully primarying establishment Democrats is a signifier of increasing socialist sympathies. However, and this is critical, it will not lead to socialism. It will also not end imperialism, and therefore it will not be able to stop the gradual decay of the current capitalist system. There are hard limits to what reforms can accomplish without revolutionary change.

    I have no idea what criticisms you are referring to that I haven't challenged, if you have an example I'm more than happy to address it. As for accusations of LLM use being "common," I've only ever seen you and one other user make such an accusation, so again, not sure where you're getting that idea. Also not sure what you mean by "questionably sourced," if you have an example of a source you are skeptical of, then please let me know.

    I am in fact a serious person. I have fun too, of course, but I have been consistent in my socialist views and advocacy, and active in real life. I put my words into practice because I want a better world. Am I Lenin 2? By no means, I don't have such a high opinion of myself. Do I put in effort? Yes, I spend hours every week outside of work continuing my organizing and education/study efforts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    I had to go through a stage of deliberately training myself to not great-(wo)man a few comrades, but I still love you all.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Haha, it's an easy trap. Socialism comes from the working class, while leaders are important we have to understand that the working class as a whole is the maker of history.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (1 reply)
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    But the protests for women's liberation were real, and the Iranian regime shut off the internet during those protests in order to suppress them. Even if Mossad was involved in stirring up that unrest it does not justify the state crackdown, nor can it be denied that there is grassroots support for women's liberation in Iran. If you want your country to be less susceptible to manipulation by foreign agents your best bet is to give the people what they want so that they aren't negatively polarized against their government in the first place. Every injustice enforced is an exploitable weakness that your adversaries can seize upon.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I agree that women's rights not only can, but should be improved in Iran. The important nuance here, though, is that social progress is severely stunted when a society is under active siege and infiltration. All states inevitably become more repressive than they otherwise would be when their legitimate security concerns are relentlessly violated. The quest of the Iranian people for social progress is interconnected with the quest of the Iranian people for sovereignty.

    Mossad infiltrating the protests, that started with legitimate grievances, exacerbated the violence in an attempt to weaken the Iranian state, preceding the war. It was deliberate, and not for the benefit of women in any capacity. Iranians now are more socially cohesive than before the protests ramped up precisely due to the resistance against imperialist aggression.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    I agree with all of that except for the inevitability of repression in a society under siege. Yes, that is a historical trend, but it's also a choice that leadership makes, and it's the wrong one. If the Iranian government made concessions on women's rights, queer rights, etc. while holding firm on national sovereignty it would reduce the level of negative polarization the Iranian people have towards their government giving Mossad less to work with to destabilize Iran.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago*

    I can agree with it being the morally wrong decision by leadership while also understanding that the progression of history is driven primarily by material conditions, rather than the actions of individuals. The social struggle in Iran is one that is driven by the consciousness of the masses in Iran, and their struggle at this moment is principally against Israeli and Statesian aggression. Unfortunately, the fight for women's rights in Iran cannot be genuinely struggled against when Israel and the US take every chance they can to leverage that into being able to commit genocide against the Iranian people.

    Would it be excellent if women's rights were improved from the top-down in Iran? Yes. Is it likely to happen? No. This is why taking a materialist analysis of the Iranian war and events leading up to it is so critical for understanding our historic moment.

    Regardless, the Iranian people presently near-fully support the IRGC and the Iranian government. Even if some do have a desire to socially reform Iran, achieving better rights, right now it's secondary by far to surviving the war and maintaining sovereignty. That's why these struggles are interconnected so closely.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    You should watch Johnny Harris' video about the Western puppet regimes installed in Iran.

    Maybe worry a little more about US laws restricting freedom for women lately.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago

    I've actually already seen this video, and it doesn't change my stance. Iranian leadership has a choice in how they respond to foreign manipulation and they do not have to respond with repression of their own populace for fear of their adversaries taking advantage of social unrest when they could instead reduce social unrest by making concessions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    I do belive the DPRK is a legitimate socialist state, yes. The economy is worker run and controlled. They are incredibly poor, largely due to sanctions, but like Cuba they stretch what they do have very far. That's also why Cuba and the DPRK have such strong and positive relations, with Cuba only recognizing the ROK in 2024.

    As for the idea that I use LLMs for any of my comments, that's false. I sometimes copy chunks from older comments if I have already addressed a topic in detail, but I have never used any LLM for any of my comments. No idea where this came from, other than the fact that some of my comments are longer, which really is just because I'm a yapper. I don't appreciate the baseless allegations of LLM use as a means to undermine my points, if you oppose what I'm saying, tell me directly.

    I am definitely a communist and a propagandist, I agree with that. I believe socialism to be necessary, and devote time and money to organizing work and outreach. I definitely fit the definition of propagandist as someone deliberately trying to get people to become sympathetic to socialism and communism and join an org, but that doesn't mean what I say is incorrect either. It's all true.

    If you disagree with what I have to say, tell me directly. Don't just lie to others about me in an attempt to undermine socialist talking points, it's enormously bad-faith to do so.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    And by listing the three major US enemies (currently) in two comments, with reasoning provided by their very media apparatus, you're the prime example on how the tighter control on media (and social media) actually affects the populace. Thanks for participating.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    Since when is Trump's word gospel? Also, who cares, if you're US-American.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    You declared I was "the prime example on how the tighter control on media (and social media) actually affects the populace" solely for the reason that I "list[ed] the three major US enemies". This is akin to how Trump supporters declare every criticism of Trump as "TDS", or how Israelis claim every criticism of their country is "anti-semitism". You can't shut down a conversation like that here, maybe on .ml, but not here, people are more curious, more prone to individual thought, more prone to asking questions.

    Trump's word isn't gospel, his actions are too, like how he fought his own party to prevent sanctions being placed on Russia, or how they are the only country he hasn't placed tariffs on.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    You declared (...) solely on the reason (...)

    No, I declared you a prime example, because you were immediately using Whataboutism hinged on these three main adversaries (and none other), which only exist as a narrative because the US government declared them as such and you combined these name drops with western propaganda talking points in an attempt, and as the sole reason to comment at all, to discredit a well formulated critique of the US ... on a post about the US committing war crimes. It's like a learned behaviour.

    listen to what Trump is saying about Putin.

    Trump's word isn't gospel, his actions are

    It's getting confusing.
    Russia is not "the only country he hasn't placed tariffs on", as the US actually has placed tariffs on Russia, as well as heavy sanctions. But you know, the importance of tariffs vanishes, if you can just sanction a country out of the market and into compliance, anyway? There's also almost no tariffs on the DPRK or Cuba, because they are heavily sanctioned already. Namely secondary sanctions (which are against international law), that disallow other countries to trade with the sanctioned countries.

    how he fought his own party to prevent sanctions being placed on Russia

    Maybe it's me, but I find this to be theatre. But maybe you can write down your actual thinking on how the overall dynamics work here., you sound like you're heavily on the Krasnov theory.

    Source Tariffs
    Source Sanctions

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (12 children)

    China and Russia figured out how to do it with social media. Most of their people don't even know of their empire's crimes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago* (11 children)

    That's not really true, though. The US has a far more sophisticated media apparatus, that has existed for longer. China's censorship is open and well-understood by the population, the US's is secret while pretending it doesn't exist. Further, neither China nor Russia are "empires," not for centuries in China's case and about a century in Russia's case.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (10 children)

    That's not really true, though. China and Russia have a far more sophisticated media censorship apparatus, and their polling indicates they have no idea the level of propaganda they are being faced with every day. Half of Americans hate their own country, and are free to post about it on the internet, and consume media that aligns with their view, without fear of being arrested like Ding Jiaxi.

    And tell that to the refugees of China's raping of its neighbours fish zones, or Russia's brutal invasion of Ukraine.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    The internet is not a neutral space. A country having its own social media platforms instead of letting American companies harvest their citizens’ data is not truly censorship.

    their polling indicates they have no idea the level of propaganda they are being faced with every day.

    You're being solipsistic. Not everything you disagree with based on personal whims is "propaganda."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Lots of countries have their own social media platforms. Only China will jail you for posting questions like "how much do our leaders make?"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ding_Jiaxi

    Only Russia will jail you for posting "I disagree with the war."

    Only Iran will jail you for posting "I think women should have more rights."

    You're being solipsistic.

    Nobody talks like this. Nobody in the real world says this. I know you're capable of talking without using 5 dollar words to obscure logic and escape from an argument in a cloud of poor reasoning.

    Not everything you disagree with based on personal whims is "propaganda."

    That's right. But we're not talking about whether or not Captain Picard is the best Star Trek captain. We're not discussing disagreements on personal whims. We're talking about whether or not an unelected state apparatus with the power in the hands of a handful of rich elites should have total control over everything you're allowed to see and say. That's propaganda. That's what's going on in Russia, and Iran, and China. And probably America soon, the way they're headed with Trump.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago*

    I'm afraid you're being maliciously obtuse. There is no need to criticize my pretty regular vocabulary. And the fact that you think the USA hasn't historically been at the center of the imperialist propaganda machine fruther confirms the need to end our conversation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    "No you" is not a compelling argument. Why is it that you believe Russia and China to have a more sophisticated propaganda apparatus, despite the US's propaganda apparatus existing for centuries longer, with far more money behind it? Further, the idea that speech is free in the US is horribly wrong. Left-wing media and organizing like the subpoena of BreakThrough News and the attacks by Marco Rubio on the DSA, PSL, and even individuals like Hasan Piker prove that what matters is that only capitalist speech is allowed, while workers are crushed.

    Chinese censorship targets those that undermine their socialist system. This is openly understood, and thus subversive organizing is also targeted, just like in the US. The major difference is that the CPC is a worker-party, and is thoroughly subject to the will of the entire working class. This is why Chinese citizens have much greater approval for their own democracy than the US does:

    And to drive the point home, the bottom 50% of China has been consistently prioritized, while elsewhere the poor are discarded and left behind:

    Meaningless sloganeering is not an actual way to understand the world. If we flail about in vulgar "whataboutisms" rather than genuine comparistics, then we will fail to actually see what's going on. We must, as the Chinese Marxists say, seek truth from facts. We must not presuppose a conclusion and justify it based on ideology.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Why is it you are aware "no you" isn't a compelling argument, and then proceed to make a "no you" argument?

    You make bold declarations like "the US's propaganda apparatus existing for centuries longer, with far more money behind it", with absolutely no evidence or sources to back up these claims.

    China does not target people who undermine socialism. It targets people who undermine capitalism. People like Ding Jiaxi, who called on Xi Jinping and other top-level government officials to lead the way in dislosing their financial assets.

    Trump supporters in Red leaning states also have extremely high approval ratings for their leader, this is evidence of the efficacy of propaganda, not democracy.

    An unsourced image comparing China to America proves nothing to anyone, other than the fact that you are locked in a propaganda campaign to manufacture consent for a new cold war.

    I agree that meaningless sloganeering is not an actual way to understand the world. So why do you do it? Do you accuse me of "whataboutisms" while engaging in them yourself in a Trump-style tactic to dismiss any such accusation as more "no you" arguments?

    The Chinese are not Marxists, and they do not seek the truth, they bury it.

    It's good that you read about the subpoena of BreakThrough News and the attacks by Marco Rubio on the DSA, PSL, and even individuals like Hasan Piker.

    Read up on Ding Jiaxi too.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    I did not make a "no you" argument, I explicitly addressed your argument and changed it to one of comparistics. I referenced hard data and gave a materialist response, drawing on the immense improval of living conditions in China.

    The fact that the US's propaganda apparatus has existed for centuries longer can be understood by the simple fact that the modern Chinese and Russian states are less than a century old. Both saw immense changes in societal makeup and organization between the old states and the new. The US emerged as the world's imperial hegemon in the aftermath of World War II, as I already explained earlier, while China was just forming its new society and attempting to overcome the problems of feudalism. The USSR, meanwhile, dissolved in 1991, resulting in the modern Russian Federation and intense economic devastation, devastation that resulted in the single greatest drop in life expectancy in history outside of wartime.

    As for Ding Jiaxi, he was organizing directly against the socialist state of China, in a subversive manner. This is openly understood to be illegal in China, as it is in every state. China is a socialist country, not capitalist, so the process of developing socialism comes through reform, not subversion. China has been governed by Marxist-Leninists since 1949, and this has only strengthened under Xi Jinping. More schools for Marxism have been opened in China, and the CPC has over 100 million members.

    You do not have an argument, you merely copy and paste what I said while changing keywords. This is ineffective propaganda on your part at best.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    You’re talking to a .ml user.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    I don't see how pointing out the instance I use disproves the points I raised. I think it's fairly obvious that I'm a Marxist-Leninist, I don't attempt to hide that. I suppose I could make an alt account and try to crypto-advocate for socialism, but what would be the point?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (1 reply)