360
Evidence that lemmy.ml weaponizes rule 1 to censor criticism of russia and china (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/fediverse@lemmy.world
locked 293 comments fedilink hide all child comments
💯 1
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Was anyone hiding being a "tankie"? I mean I don't really use the term I just call it Marxist-Leninist but if that's what you want to call it I'm fine with that. I mean I'm clearly not trying to hide my political views if you look at my username. Not sure what you needed "evidence" for. But more power to ya i guess.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    XiJinpingStanAccount honestly sounds like a parody handle, I'd expect the likelyhood of such a user to actually favour Xi Jinping rather low.

    Personally I don't understand why we'd want less democracy, instead of more of it. Citizens assemblies is the logical move, for anyone wanting more power to the people - But I guess my views are closer to anarchist movements than anything, I don't want to alter everything. I just want to kill intergenerational wealth.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (3 children)

    Well it's sort of a parody but the other way. I am parodying stan accounts by making one about Xi Jinping, who I do like, and who is not the typical recipient of a stan account. Also, speaking about democracy being 'more' or 'less' is odd. I think it's impossible to do so. Because nobody can agree on what makes things more or less democratic. For example, I think China is more democratic than the US. Not less. Why? Because my metric for the level of 'democracy' in a nation is how closely that nations policies match the will of its people and how happy the people are with its policies. Others may say what makes something more democratic is simply more chances to vote on things. Or perhaps they would say the less seperation from the final decision the better. (direct vs representative democracy). So, like I said, a hard thing to discuss without causing confusion by using the same words to mean different things.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    example, I think China is more democratic than the US.

    Both countries are a clusterfuck from a democratic/people decides perspective. The way both countries are ruled is quite similar. They're two sides of the same coin.

    Because my metric for the level of 'democracy' in a nation is how closely that nations policies match the will of its people and how happy the people are with its policies

    This is really hard to gauge for China specifically, because there's as you noted no electorally elected officials.

    Furthermore it's an authoritarian leadership, known to punish dissidents. It's a very complex topic to go into who benefits and who don't, from the current Chinese policies. Chinas economy is as much, if not more, dependent on gig labour as the US is. The gig labourers are not in better conditions in China, than they are in the US.

    It's not unheard of that parents pay for their adult children's medicine, because the only income their child could get was from a poorly paid delivery gig.

    There's an issue globally with the elites having grown more greedy, especially in the past four decades. I think one of US, UK, China or Russia is going to see their elite lose power and fall to a popular uprising. Before any other oligarchical society, at which all oligarchs are going to give crumbs back to the people.

    Just like European royal houses gave more wealth and power to their commoners as a response to the French revolution.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •